China’s Potential Impact on Germany’s Defence Expansion

Welcome, Net Zero News readers,

In an era where global security dynamics are shifting, the focus on military strength is intensifying, especially in Europe. Germany, under the leadership of Friedrich Merz, aims to establish itself as Europe’s foremost military power. However, this ambition is intricately linked to a critical but precarious reality: the dependency on Chinese raw materials for its defence capabilities.

As the German government embarks on an extraordinary rearmament plan, the implications of relying on China for essential resources have sparked a wave of concern among policymakers and experts alike. The stakes are high, and the potential consequences of this dependency could jeopardise Germany’s military ambitions.

Germany’s Military Ambitions

With a commitment to transform the Bundeswehr into “the strongest conventional army in Europe,” Berlin has pledged to allocate hundreds of billions of euros towards its defence sector by 2029. This marks a significant departure from decades of fiscal restraint and prioritisation of social spending over military investment.

Yet, as Germany invests heavily in military vehicles, missiles, and ammunition, a crucial question arises: what happens when the supply chain for these military necessities depends on a foreign power? Jakob Kullik, a researcher at Chemnitz University of Technology, succinctly captures this concern: “If China-sourced materials suddenly fall away, that could stop our defence industrial plans in their tracks.”

The Fragile Foundation of Rearmament

The reality is that every piece of military equipment ordered as part of Germany’s rearmament initiative hinges on raw materials that few outside the defence industry may even recognise. The Federation of German Industries (BDI) highlights that rare earth elements such as neodymium and dysprosium—and other critical materials like tungsten, graphite, titanium, and high-purity magnesium—are integral to the functionality of advanced military systems.

These materials are essential for powering radar arrays, electric motors, missile guidance fins, thermal sights, and drone propulsion systems—the very components that define modern warfare. Alarmingly, most of these resources are sourced from China, which accounts for over 50% of global processing capacity for several critical minerals and a staggering 86% for defence-relevant materials like gallium and germanium.

The Strategic Risks of Dependency

The implications of this dependency are profound. The BDI warns that the European Union imports a staggering 95% of its strategic raw materials, relying on non-EU countries for 90% of these imports, with Germany’s domestic processing capabilities almost non-existent. This places Germany in a precarious position, particularly as it seeks to bolster its military capabilities.

As the complexity and capability of weapons systems increase, so too do the risks associated with this dependency. For instance, the Eurofighter jets rely heavily on lightweight titanium, primarily processed in China, while Rheinmetall has confirmed that its armour-piercing tank shells utilise dense tungsten cores—another material whose availability is threatened by geopolitical tension.

The German economy ministry has acknowledged these raw material risks but has yet to provide comprehensive data or a clear strategy to mitigate them. The threat is not merely theoretical; China has actively limited exports of critical raw materials to Western defence firms, causing production delays and cost increases across the industry.

Comparative Approaches: EU vs. US

While the European Union has made promises to secure access to key minerals, experts like Kullik argue that it has failed to take the necessary strategic steps. The legal frameworks in Europe stand in stark contrast to those in the United States, where raw materials are treated as strategic assets. The Defence Production Act empowers the US government to fund domestic mining operations, steer supply chains, and prioritise defence needs during emergencies. Moreover, the US maintains a national reserve to safeguard against supply chain disruptions in wartime scenarios.

In contrast, Brussels has adopted a softer approach. The Critical Raw Materials Act sets high-level targets and frameworks but leaves the actual implementation to voluntary coordination among member states, lacking the enforcement power of a central authority. Kullik notes, “We don’t have a state stockpile, unlike with gas or oil. This kind of preventive, strategic preparedness—I just don’t see it yet.”

The Call for Action

Some German lawmakers believe that the EU’s current approach is insufficient to address these challenges. Vanessa Zobel, a member of the Bundestag’s economic affairs committee, criticises the Critical Raw Materials Act as well-intentioned but ineffective, arguing that national governments must step in to secure supply chains, especially in defence sectors.

Zobel warns that Germany’s raw materials dependency poses a direct threat to national security. “Without secure supply chains, there can be no credible military deterrence,” she states emphatically. She advocates for the creation of national stockpiles as a temporary measure, but acknowledges that such reserves are finite. To achieve true resilience, Zobel insists that Germany must reactivate its own resources, pointing to untapped lithium deposits and the prevailing political resistance to domestic mining.

Germany must shift its approach to viewing itself as a geopolitical actor rather than relying solely on market forces. The call for a “Zeitenwende” or “turning point,” articulated by former Chancellor Olaf Scholz, underscores the need for a fundamental rethink of Germany’s stance on security and defence, particularly in light of the evolving geopolitical landscape following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

A Path Forward

As Germany sets its sights on becoming a military powerhouse, the challenges posed by reliance on foreign materials cannot be overlooked. To realise its ambition, Germany must invest in developing domestic resources, secure supply chains, and foster strategic partnerships that reduce dependency on a single nation.

The stakes are too high for complacency. The future of Germany’s defence capabilities—and by extension, its role within Europe—depends on a proactive and coordinated response to the vulnerabilities posed by critical mineral dependency. It is imperative that policymakers act swiftly to ensure that Germany’s rearmament is built on a solid and resilient foundation, free from the uncertainties that foreign dependencies entail.

As Friedrich Merz leads the charge toward redefining Germany’s military landscape, the decisions made today will shape the nation’s defence posture for generations to come. The imperative to act is clear; the time for strategic foresight and resilience is now.