Can we achieve the energy transition without the “American war machine”?

In addition to the constant cries of “from the river to the sea…”, a common refrain among pro-Palestinian protesters at college camps is voiced by Barnard College student Maria Grosso, who wants “the United States to stop its war machine.”

Ms. Grosso, a Palestinian supporter who believes that Israel has no right to even exist as a Jewish country (source), expressed a refrain often heard during these protests. Protesters not only support the Palestinians, but also demand that the United States completely stop engaging in international affairs.

Let us assume that this view prevails and that the United States returns to the isolationism that generally dominated the country’s foreign policy for more than a century before World War II. What impact would this have on our ability to transition to green energy and transition away from fossil fuels?

Unlike fossil fuels, electricity is not a tangible thing. It cannot be transported by pipeline or truck. To be of any value to civilization, it requires battery storage and near-continuous transportation on transmission lines. This means that rare metals (REEs) such as lithium and cobalt are needed for citizens to have access to reliable, accessible and useful sources of green energy. Without these REEs, the use of electricity generated by solar farms, windmills, hydroelectric plants and the like is neither economically viable nor practical.

The largest lithium deposits in the world are located in South America, on the border of Chile, Argentina and Bolivia. (Source) Of the three bordering countries, Bolivia has the largest proven deposits. Unfortunately for the United States, Bolivia has granted a Chinese company the rights to develop its lithium. (Source) This means the United States may have to look elsewhere for this key element. A recent study from the University of Pittsburgh found that most of America’s lithium demand could be met by wastewater used in hydraulic fracturing operations. (Source). However, this technology is still exploratory and has not yet been proven to be applicable on a large scale. Other areas in the United States, such as the Panamint Valley near Death Valley in California, have also been identified as potentially containing lithium deposits, but environmental concerns have so far prevented actual exploration in these locations. (Source). In short, the ability of the United States to locate and mine or otherwise produce lithium is limited by characteristics and practicalities beyond our control, and we may therefore need to secure access to lithium from international sources to ensure that we will have access to enough of this rare metal to fulfill our green energy plans. If countries like China do not share our urgent need for an energy transition, there is little chance of achieving such an energy transition.

What about cobalt? Most of our cobalt currently comes from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where it is mined using child slave labor. (Source). If we dismantled the American “war machine,” any ability of the United States to pressure Congo to eliminate the use of child labor would undoubtedly cease. From a strictly geopolitical point of view, our continued access to cobalt would then be significantly jeopardized. This is not least because Congo, a truly huge country geographically, is often politically unstable. but this is also because there have been numerous coups d’état in Congo’s sister countries such as Guinea, Niger and Burkina Faso over the last few years. However, every time the military took power, it swore allegiance to Vladimir Putin. (Source). Putin certainly has no qualms about sending his war machine wherever he deems advantageous. If something like this happens in Congo, our supply of critical cobalt will likely run out soon.

There are many lesser-known REEs necessary to implement a true energy transition. What protects American access to them beyond the sheer power and influence of our own “war machine,” a muscle that often only needs to be flexed a little to get the desired results? Meanwhile, China has so far used soft power to gain most of its influence, but at the same time it has massively expanded its military to the point that it may even consider attacking Taiwan in a few years. The world knows it. Russia, of course, will send its troops wherever Putin deems it advantageous.

Imagine a world in which the “Green Party” gains power in the United States, then immediately guts the military as promised, then withdraws from international affairs and declares that all the money currently spent on the military will be spent on the energy transition – regardless of how this transition might even be affected in the absence of a continuous supply of REEs such as lithium and cobalt. Will we do the planet the greatest favor it has ever received by dismantling our “war machine”, or will we very quickly fall into a scenario where whatever is left of this war machine will have to be used to safeguard our ability to even attempt such a transition?