Why US and China are battling for Congo’s critical minerals

Over the years, China has dominated Africa’s mineral sector through investments in mining and refining. Companies based in China own or operate as much as 80 per cent of critical mineral production in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), much of which is sent to China for processing. The DRC is the largest producer of cobalt and the second-largest producer of copper.

The DRC also possesses substantial reserves of lithium, coltan, manganese, tantalum, tungsten, gold, tin and diamonds. Like many mineral-rich countries, the DRC lacks the infrastructure to transport these minerals worldwide. The DRC lacks infrastructure and is embroiled in a decades-long civil war, and China has taken advantage of these factors.

How did China dominate DRC’s critical mineral sector?

Its risk appetite has given China overwhelming dominance in the critical mineral sector, particularly in processing and refining. It is estimated that China has over 90 per cent control of refined commercial-grade cobalt chemicals, battery-grade tricobalt tetroxide and nickel-cobalt-manganese cathode precursor materials, while having over 80 per cent control of battery-grade cobalt sulphate.

China also controls over 50 per cent of finished copper production. This total control over the entire value chain is a cause for concern, as China has used it as a geopolitical lever, making the entire supply chain vulnerable.

How is the US challenging China’s dominance in DRC?

The United States has responded to this dominance by making it a core pillar of national security. It is working aggressively to build a critical-mineral supply chain that reduces reliance on China and increases its influence in the region. The Lobito Corridor is one such example through which the US is trying to reduce its reliance on China. This 1,300 km railway line stretches from the Atlantic coast of Angola to the DRC and Zambia’s Copperbelt.

To date, commitments exceeding $6 billion have been made to the project, with the US committing more than $4 billion, including a loan of up to $553 million from the US International Development Finance Corporation to upgrade the railway infrastructure. The project aims to expand and protect critical mineral supply chains, increase rail transport capacity and reduce freight times and costs.

The US has also made efforts to address the long-standing conflict that has plagued the mineral-rich eastern DRC for decades; however, the most prominent faction fighting the government, M23, is said to be backed by Rwanda, according to various experts. M23 controls most strategic areas and mineral-rich territories in eastern DRC, helping it build a self-sustaining war economy.

On June 27, 2025, the DRC and Rwanda signed a peace agreement mediated by the US, and in December 2025, US President Donald Trump hosted the signing of the Washington Accords for Peace and Prosperity between the DRC and Rwanda. These accords fortify the commitments to end conflict, foster economic cooperation and build a foundation for lasting peace. Both countries also signed the Regional Economic Integration Framework (REIF), a bilateral initiative that would enable investment opportunities for the American private sector in the region.

What agreements are expanding the US footprint in DRC?

The US has also signed bilateral instruments with both countries, such as the Strategic Partnership Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, wherein economic and resource security are core pillars of the partnership between the two countries; the Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the United States and the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo concerning an expanded security partnership; and the US-Rwanda framework for shared economic prosperity.

American private companies, backed by the US administration, are also expanding their footprint in the DRC to counter Chinese influence. For instance, in 2025, American technology firm KoBold Metals (backed by Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates) secured a deal to acquire the disputed Manono lithium deposit, one of the largest lithium deposits in the world, and launch large-scale critical mineral exploration, while another American firm, Virtus Minerals, signed a megadeal for copper and cobalt deposits.

The commitments have also materialised early this year, as the US and DRC have already held the first meeting of the Joint Steering Committee, and the DRC government has designated its initial list of Strategic Asset Reserves (SAR), in which American companies would be given preferential treatment. The US Treasury has also imposed sanctions on the Rwanda Defence Force (RDF) and four senior Rwandan military officers for supporting M23.

The US’s largest investment to date in the DRC remains the memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Orion CMC, a consortium led by Orion Resource Partners in partnership with the US government, and mining company Glencore to acquire 40 per cent in Mutanda Mining and Kamoto Copper Company — two of the largest cobalt and copper operations in the DRC. The deal is valued at $9 billion. Glencore has operational control; however, Orion secures the right to direct sales to nominated buyers, a significant move given that Mutanda has historically supplied cobalt to Chinese supply chains.

Can the US loosen China’s grip on DRC’s critical minerals?

The DRC’s minerals have become a focal point of US-China rivalry. While China’s investments in infrastructure, along with its dominance in processing and refining, won’t be dislodged anytime soon, the US’s active participation through diplomacy and financing shows it won’t be a passive player in the DRC now. Yet whether these commitments translate into lasting results remains uncertain, as violence in eastern DRC has persisted even after the accords, and critics question whether the agreements will deliver tangible change on the ground.

---

The writer is Research Fellow, India Foundation. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.