William Byrd
For decades, Afghanistan’s mineral resources—estimated to be worth upward of $1 trillion—have interested the U.S. and other foreign powers. Afghan minerals have sometimes been billed as a potential geopolitical and economic justification for continued U.S. military engagement, as a source of money to pay for the cost of Afghan security forces, and even as a way to subsidize foreign private security forces to replace U.S. troops. None of these ideas, frequently criticized as impractical, have panned out.
Recently, the emphasis on “critical minerals” and the U.S. critical minerals strategy has revived some interest in Afghanistan as a potential source of strategic minerals. The Taliban authorities have signaled readiness for Western and U.S. investments in such resources, even as they have issued large numbers of mining contracts to Chinese and other companies.
However, Afghanistan is unlikely to become a high-priority country for major U.S. or other Western investments in extraction of critical minerals. It lacks a strategic advantage in comparison with other mineral-rich countries. Though the country has massive estimated (and some proven) solid mineral reserves, the obstacles to large-scale exploitation are daunting. There are logistical impediments that make most profitable large-scale mining operations implausible. Energy, transport, and other infrastructure present severe bottlenecks, and water—required for processing many minerals—is the country’s scarcest resource. As a low-income country with limited funds and weak institutions, Afghanistan is especially poorly equipped to deal with the serious environmental fallout associated with mining operations. And as a landlocked country, Afghanistan faces higher transport costs and more obstacles than countries closer to the main areas of demand or with access to the sea.
Additionally, there are structural impediments that discourage mining operations. The legal framework in Afghanistan is rudimentary and does not give international mining companies confidence. Afghanistan’s financial isolation from international banks and normal transactions in the wake of the 2021 Taliban takeover means that moving large amounts of money for major mining investments and their profits would be difficult. Finally, the Taliban’s reputational toxicity internationally—due to their draconian restrictions against women and girls and other human rights abuses—means that Western mining companies risk aggravating their shareholders if they choose to invest in Afghanistan.
Why the Strategic Emphasis on Critical Minerals?
No comments:
Post a Comment