It is quite correct that in terms of rare earth there is nothing special in China except perhaps for the world's single largest rare earth deposit. It is also correct that the West has outsourced rare earths processing to China in order to migrate significant environmental issues at home.

This results in the following situation:

1. The West lacks 30 years of research and development in rare earth. Practically all research papers published have Chinese authors. 2. There are more than 20,000 patents resting on all things rare earth, most of them Chinese. 3. China has perfected the incredibly tedious refining of rare earth to near perfection. Core parts of the know-how are prohibited to export from China. 4. 70% of the primary rare earth products, rare earth compounds, that the West is buying from China are overproduced by-products that are sold at a quarter of their production cost. The lion's share of the remaining 30% are exports to Japan, the sole and single country that still maintains a dwindling rare earth independence from China, largely by state-lead loans to rare earth production abroad, most notably Lynas, who have to deliver most of their value carrying product to Japan (that also goes for anticipated US output of Lynas). 5. 90% of the added value of global rare earths occurs in China, which is the sole and single functioning global rare earth market with complete value chains. This means that each and every Western rare earth producer will have to sell to China. This includes current sales of Lynas (Australia-Malaysia) and MP Materials (USA). In case of MP 98% of sales are generated by selling to China, in absence of alternative markets. 6. The West does not even have industrial standards for rare earths, so there is not even the most basic common denominator.

As you can see from 3. above, there is no big issue for the west if China should declare a rare earth embargo.

The West's trouble however is, that it does not only lack rare earth mining and processing to usable compounds, the West also does not have the capacity to produce rare earth permanent magnets. That is a problem in terms of all things carbon neutral, be it offshore wind turbines, be electric vehicles, your smart phone, your gasoline guzzling car or even your electric tooth brush, as China also controls more than 90% of the global rare earth permanent magnet market - and already has now the capacity to supply 100% of rapidly growing world demand forecast until 2030.

Neither rare earths nor rare earths permanent magnets are commodities. The West has no industrial standards for them - a minimum requirement for a commodity. Rare earths best compare to specialty chemicals. Rare earth permanent magnets are also an art form, if one wants to produce both technically and commercially feasible and competitive products.

All this we have known for more than 10 years and absolutely nothing has happened. Recent actions by DoE and DoD in the US are meant to show activism due to pressure from the political and social side, but ineffective. Lynas and MP were funded to produce products that they have no history and no expertise of producing. Also their mineral base is unsuitable for that.

Bringing a rare earth mine cum production of rare earth compounds up to speed takes 10 years and US$ 1 billion, to participate in a US$ 13 billion market, 90% of which happens in China. Investors' delight. Those project that cost less base their business case on selling an intermediate product to China.

All kinds of constructs and case scenarios are being tested, none of which is commercially feasible, all of which are technically highly doubtful.

That is the situation. There is no quick fix to it.

Xi Jinping knew all that upon his highly publicised symbolical visit to a rare earth permanent magnet producer a couple of years ago. It is a sharp weapon that can cut deep into the West's industrial base.

Yes, an embargo would also cause significant damage to Chinese enterprises. But the age of Xi is: Politics trump economics (quote of Prof. John S. Mearsheimer when speaking about the Trump administration)