Analysis The challenges ahead for South Korea’s critical minerals strategyAlthough harder to pirouette around US-China rivalry, Seoul needs both as partners as it broadens global supply chains Abhishek SharmaMay 11, 2023 An illustration of excavators mining for rare earths | Image: Korea Pro South Korea has worked to secure and diversify its critical minerals supply chains amid intensifying competition between the U.S. and China, Russia’s war against Ukraine and other disruptions. These resources, including cobalt, copper and rare earths, to name a few, are integral to the nation’s economic prosperity and safeguarding of national security. South Korea will likely pursue a “de-risking” strategy to achieve this goal. Domestic initiatives, the formation of international partnerships and targeted investments will undergird this approach, while policymakers seek to avoid excessive reliance on any single country for critical minerals. However, several challenges lie ahead. These include South Korea’s currently substantial reliance on imports of minerals. Geopolitical constraints and the trend towards securitizing critical minerals by regional blocs add further complexities to Seoul’s endeavor. ECONOMY, SECURITY AND SUPPLY CHAINS South Korea faces a challenging situation as it pursues ambitious plans for the future, particularly in electric vehicles (EVs), batteries and semiconductors — industries that rely heavily on critical minerals. Concurrently, Seoul must navigate the economic and geopolitical factors associated with these essential resources. As critical minerals have the potential to impact South Korea’s economic prosperity and national security, the country recognizes existing constraints and is strategizing to build partnerships, diversify and secure supply chains for these materials. Sunrise sectors, such as electric vehicles, batteries and solar energy, have the potential for rapid growth. But they also require critical minerals like cobalt, nickel, lithium, copper and rare earth materials. In addition, pressure from its own pledge to transition toward a clean energy model is another consideration in Seoul’s strategic planning. Competition to secure resources like critical minerals and rare earth materials will intensify further as economies prioritize sustainable growth models and economic prosperity. SEOUL’S STEPS The shift in South Korea’s critical minerals approach is driven by a seven-step strategy introduced by the Yoon administration to secure a stable critical minerals supply chain and reduce dependency on imports from any individual country. The overarching objective of this approach is to cut dependency on imports from 80% to 50% by 2030 and expand and recycle critical minerals from 2% to 20%. In recent years, South Korea has engaged in high-level diplomacy to achieve greater strength in these areas. It has addressed its dependence on China for critical mineral supplies by joining multilateral initiatives such as the Minerals Security Partnership, which focuses on bolstering critical mineral supply chains and catalyzing investments from governments and the private sector. Additionally, Seoul has sought mineral partnerships with countries like the U.S., Kazakhstan, Indonesia, Canada, Ecuador, Mongolia and Australia. South Korea has also initiated a cooperative strategy with the European Union through the Critical Raw Materials Act. This law is primarily designed to fortify Europe’s supply chain, particularly focusing on refining, processing and recycling critical raw materials. However, there are persistent challenges, including the potential for discrimination against foreign entities, regulatory obstacles and issues related to World Trade Organization rules, all of which have been noted as areas of concern by Seoul. DECOUPLING VS DE-RISKING Domestically, South Korea has implemented measures to boost its stockpile of critical minerals, increasing from 25 to 26 distinct types, with a supply duration extending from 54 to 100 days. Adopting a public-private partnership model is another positive step toward ensuring continuity, irrespective of changes in administration. Following the enactment of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the government has undertaken targeted interventions within the battery industry. Seoul has facilitated a range of incentives, including tax credits on investments, augmented credit lines, interest rate reductions and decreased insurance premiums, contributing to the preservation of competitiveness in an evolving global political environment. But given that critical minerals are intrinsically tied to economic and national security, achieving a wide-ranging domestic consensus for strategic clarity is imperative. Decoupling is not considered a viable solution amid worsening relations between the U.S. and China. Instead, de-risking has emerged as a possible pathway, as U.S. national security advisor Jake Sullivan underscored in a recent speech. South Korea will probably adopt a similar de-risking strategy, characterized by gradual steps and avoiding abrupt policy shifts. South Korea will plan this de-risking strategy carefully to prevent merely shifting its over-reliance on China for critical minerals to overly relying on the U.S. Choi Jong-un, who served as a deputy foreign minister in the previous Moon Jae-in administration, has highlighted that South Korea’s dependence on Chinese imports for critical minerals stands at 82% for 30 essential types of raw materials and even surpasses 90% for the top 10 items. In keeping with the principle of avoiding over-dependence on one source, South Korea will likely seek changes to this trade equation with China in a way that may not create further friction. Simultaneously, it is improbable that Seoul will exclusively rely on the U.S. to diversify and secure its critical minerals supply chain. The U.S. currently accounts for a mere 4% of global lithium production, 13% of cobalt and none of the nickel and graphite necessary to satisfy the demand for electric vehicles, as noted by Sullivan. SHOCK-PROOF STRATEGY? As the U.S. adopts a “foreign policy for the middle class,” South Korea appears poised to follow a similar approach emphasizing economic security, focusing on domestic investment. Last year, Yoon Suk-yeol expressed his commitment to “comprehensive resource security measures,” a direction that has since been reinforced through specific actions and initiatives. Kia recently inaugurated the country’s first electric vehicle (EV) manufacturing plant south of Seoul, and the automaker will be a key part of the Yoon administration’s goal to make the ROK a top three global EV manufacturer by 2030. While constraints associated with the U.S. alliance, such as the limitations imposed by the CHIPS Act and disruptions from the IRA, are likely to persist, South Korean corporations like LG and Hyundai have already worked to diversify their supply chains. This includes new and expanded investments in the U.S. aiming to take advantage of, the growing EV market there. Projections suggest U.S. market share for electric vehicles will rise from 26.5% to 69% from 2021 to 2025, accounting for 44% of global EV battery demand. Nevertheless, collaboration with China and Russia remains crucial for South Korea. These countries hold 35.2% and 16.8% of global rare earth reserves, respectively, making them key players in vital sectors like EVs and information and communications technology (ICTs). China accounts for 88% of rare earth magnets used in electric cars and is thus a critical partner for the ROK. Thus, cooperation on supply chain issues will continue, as reaffirmed during the meeting between the foreign ministers in January this year. Seoul has adopted a diversified strategy that extends beyond advanced economies to include emerging markets such as India. South Korea has committed to investing $1.5 billion in India to produce electric vehicles and the development of related ecosystems. Additionally, this year, it acquired an Indian plant dedicated explicitly to electric vehicle manufacturing. This approach signifies a move towards diversification across potential markets and regions while concurrently bolstering domestic capacities. The strategy seems to be centered on mitigating risks and accruing long-term benefits. South Korea has implemented its critical minerals strategy with caution to prevent any further disruption to its long-term trade interests and foreign relations, especially with China and the U.S. However, whether this approach results in reciprocity across specific sectors remains to be seen. If carefully planned and executed, Seoul’s de-risking strategy could help South Korea avoid further complications in areas of strategic importance for national and economic security. Edited by John Lee South Korea has worked to secure and diversify its critical minerals supply chains amid intensifying competition between the U.S. and China, Russia’s war against Ukraine and other disruptions. These resources, including cobalt, copper and rare earths, to name a few, are integral to the nation's economic prosperity and safeguarding of national security. Get your
|
Analysis The challenges ahead for South Korea’s critical minerals strategyAlthough harder to pirouette around US-China rivalry, Seoul needs both as partners as it broadens global supply chains South Korea has worked to secure and diversify its critical minerals supply chains amid intensifying competition between the U.S. and China, Russia’s war against Ukraine and other disruptions. These resources, including cobalt, copper and rare earths, to name a few, are integral to the nation's economic prosperity and safeguarding of national security. © Korea Risk Group. All rights reserved. |