Core Viewpoint - The ongoing competition between China and the United States over critical minerals such as gallium, germanium, and antimony is a complex battle involving legal, technological, diplomatic, and intelligence dimensions, with both sides intensifying their efforts and refusing to yield [1]. Group 1: Background of the Conflict - The conflict began in late 2023 when China tightened its export controls on key minerals, disrupting the U.S. industrial supply chain, which heavily relies on Chinese refining capabilities for over 90% of gallium and germanium and nearly all antimony [2]. - This move by China aimed to leverage its resource advantage to pressure the U.S. into concessions in other areas [2]. Group 2: Market Reactions - Following the supply cut, prices for the relevant minerals surged by two to three times, prompting the U.S. market to seek alternative sources [4]. - Thailand and Mexico emerged as significant import sources for the U.S., with their antimony exports increasing dramatically, surpassing the total from the previous three years, despite these countries having minimal domestic production [4]. Group 3: Gray Market Dynamics - A gray supply chain quickly formed, involving multinational "movers" who procure minerals from China and disguise them as ordinary minerals, fertilizers, or artworks to reroute them through third countries like Thailand and Mexico before reaching the U.S. [6]. - The transfer fees for each ton of minerals can reach up to $50,000, attracting many to take risks in this lucrative market [6]. - In the first half of 2025, a company in Guangxi reportedly shipped 3,300 tons of antimony products to the U.S. through its subsidiary in Thailand [6]. Group 4: Regulatory Responses - In response to the rampant gray trade, China has initiated investigations and enhanced regulatory measures, including the introduction of a new Mineral Resources Law and deploying AI and penetration detection systems at ports [8]. - Despite these efforts, the gray market continues to adapt, making it challenging for regulators to completely eliminate these channels [8]. Group 5: U.S. Countermeasures - The U.S. is actively addressing the situation by utilizing gray channels to acquire critical minerals while simultaneously implementing measures to mitigate risks [10]. - In May 2025, the U.S. and Vietnam agreed to impose a 40% tax on goods transiting through third countries to combat "origin laundering" practices [10]. - The U.S., Japan, India, and Australia have launched the "Quad Critical Minerals Initiative" to establish an independent supply chain and reduce reliance on China, although this initiative faces significant challenges [10]. Group 6: Conclusion of the Conflict - The essence of this mineral competition is a struggle over interests and demands, with each ton of minerals representing the outcome of multifaceted negotiations [12]. - While China holds the upper hand with its export controls, the challenge of closing gray market loopholes remains significant; conversely, the U.S. is striving to fill its supply gaps, but establishing new supply chains is not straightforward [12]. - The ultimate goal for both sides is supply chain security, with the gray market acting as a natural buffer in this ongoing conflict, which shows no signs of resolution and remains fraught with uncertainty [12].