S/PV.10114 Security Council

In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite Ms. Rosemary DiCarlo, Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, to participate in this meeting. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I now give the floor to Ms. DiCarlo. Ms. DiCarlo: I thank the United States of America for convening this meeting on an issue of tremendous importance. Critical minerals are among the main drivers of the twenty-first century economy. Countless things we take for granted — smartphones, electric vehicles and cutting-edge medical technologies — would not be possible without them. A decade ago, minerals such as lithium, cobalt and nickel had limited strategic importance. Today, they underpin the technologies powering the digital economy and the energy transition. In 2023 alone, the trade in raw and semi-processed minerals reached approximately $2.5 trillion dollars. This represents more than 10 per cent of global trade. Demand could triple by 2030 and quadruple by 2040. This dramatic rise in demand is a generational opportunity: to create jobs, diversify economies and promote sustainable development. However, the surge in demand for critical minerals is also fuelling geopolitical competition and affecting global supply chains. Mining for these minerals has been linked to human rights abuses and environmental degradation. It is incumbent on both producing and consuming countries to enact governance and regulatory frameworks to manage these resources responsibly for the benefit of all. The opportunities and risks critical minerals represent are especially stark in the case of conflict-affected States. The mining of these minerals is geographically concentrated. A number of countries and regions affected by conflict are major producers. More than 70 per cent of global cobalt extract ion, for example, occurs in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Most of the batteries that power our smart devices rely on this material. Myanmar is one of the world’s largest sources of rare earth elements essential for high-performance magnets used in advanced electronics. And Ukraine holds significant reserves of titanium and lithium indispensable for aerospace technologies and advanced manufacturing. In conflict-affected contexts, mining, when not managed responsibly, can have a devastating effect. It can weaken governance, spur illicit economies and fund criminal and armed groups. The Security Council has recognized the link between national resources and conflict. In several settings, it has imposed targeted measures, including sanctions, to stop the illicit trade in specific commodities and prevent the fuelling of conflict. The panels of experts supporting these sanctions regimes have helped to identify violations, trace supply chains and strengthen the implementation of measures to curb illicit exploitation and trade. Their work has yielded a wealth of knowledge and analysis on the broader phenomenon of how illicit resource extraction supports armed groups and sustains conflict economies. The Council has, for example, established sanctions regimes in relation to the situations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Libya and imposed restrictions on Al-Shabaab. The Council has also requested United Nations peace operations to work with national governments to help to curb the illegal exploitation of natural resources by armed groups. The Great Lakes region is a case in point. In the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, control over mineral-rich areas is a major driver of violence and shapes regional political dynamics. Since the start of the current crisis in the area, the Alliance Fleuve Congo/Mouvement du 23 mars coalition has reportedly earned more than $1 million dollars a month from illicit mining and smuggling. United Nations peacekeepers in the country are working with Congolese authorities and regional partners to reduce armed groups’ influence over mining areas and disrupt illicit mineral supply chains. To complement these actions, the Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for the Great Lakes Region is supporting efforts to address illicit resource extraction. He has worked with the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region and the Kimberley Process to enhance traceability, strengthen compliance mechanisms and reinforce shared governance of natural resources. We see three priorities to help conflict-affected countries to realize the potential presented by critical minerals. First, the extraction of these resources must deliver just and equitable outcomes. Across the United Nations system, we are working closely with national authorities to help them to strengthen institutions that manage their national resources, enhance their regulatory frameworks and maximize their peacebuilding benefits. We help governments to strengthen their ability to negotiate fair mining agreements, build domestic capacity for processing and refinement and mitigate any adverse effects of mining. Secondly, we need multilateral and regional action to strengthen governance, improve the traceability of minerals to curb illicit flows and build more resilient supply chains. Dialogue between producing and consuming countries as well as with industry and regional organizations is necessary. Thirdly, we must deploy our peacemaking instruments to mitigate and resolve disputes over natural resources. Our mediators factor considerations related to national resources into peace talks. This can help conflict parties to identify ways to share benefits and develop cooperative relationships. With the Council’s support, we will continue to prioritize diplomacy and create the political space for engagement on these issues. The opportunities ahead of us are significant. The fair and responsible harnessing of critical minerals can help to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, and it can help to promote peace. Achieving these goals will require concerted action by Member States, the private sector, civil society and the United Nations.

I thank Ms. DiCarlo for her remarks. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as Secretary of Energy of the United States of America. I want to begin by extending my appreciation and gratitude to the exceptional men and women of the American military. Their commitment and sacrifice safeguard our nation and uphold stability and security around the world. I cannot sit before Council members today without speaking about the challenges posed by the Iranian regime. For 47 years, this brutal dictatorship has spread chaos, death and instability around the world, threatening international peace and economic opportunity for so many. It is only fitting that the United States is presiding over the Security Council at this moment, because confronting challenges like this requires real leadership. President Trump has been clear on Iran: Iran’s brutal regime will not prevail. Together we have confronted it, and together we will defeat it. I thank Ambassador Waltz for inviting me to lead today’s meeting of the Security Council. It is with great pleasure that the United States is leading this crucial conversation about critical minerals, energy and resources. This topic is not merely economic. It is fundamental to prosperity and peace. That is why I have been clear: we need more energy, not less energy, and we need it now. Without affordable, reliable and secure energy, nothing works. Energy is life. The absence of energy is poverty, despair and death. It is how we grow our economies; it is how we innovate, power our daily lives and secure our nations. Energy provides stability, competitiveness and opportunities for a better future. In recent years, many governments have adopted aggressive climate policies. These policies, made in the name of climate change, have been unrealistic and poorly planned. The energy delusions implicit in climate policies represent real and growing threats to nations and peoples around the world. If I can elaborate, only a billion people today live lives recognizable to anyone in this room. We wear nice clothes. We travel to meetings. We live in climate-controlled buildings. We have access to modern medicine. It is the wonder of the modern world. Seven billion people aspire to the lives we have. The only road from here to there is massively more energy. On the other end of the spectrum, 2 billion people — one quarter of humankind — today do not have access to clean cooking fuels. They cook and heat their homes the same way all of our ancestors did, by burning wood, charcoal and dung indoors. The indoor air pollution from this alone kills more than 2 million people, as estimated by the United Nations health agency. These are giant problems, and we cannot take our eyes off of them. Ensuring energy abundance means keeping our country safe. Energy security is national security. Those who have restricted energy supply have, at the end of the day, increased their dependence on unfriendly sources beyond their borders, while displacing their own energy-intensive industries outside of their own borders. We saw what happened four years ago when our European friends faced energy problems because they heavily relied on Russian oil and gas. Energy is too important and too central to life to get wrong, and it is the same with critical minerals. Open markets keep the global economy running and reduce the risk of conflict. It is in the security interest of the United States and our allies to not overly depend on any single country for materials critical to our economies and national security. The work we are doing today, especially on the strategic importance of critical minerals and energy, is directly tied to preventing conflict and building a world in which countries can cooperate and move forward together. Energy and critical minerals power every sector of our economy and underpin everything in our lives. If a device has a button, or it turns on and off, it requires magnets made from rare earth elements and the energy needed to produce them. That is why we need to strengthen our supply chains and increase our access to energy. The United States and our allies are working hard to keep the seas open and our major trade lanes, from the Panama Canal to the Red Sea to the Strait of Hormuz, safe and flowing because the world depends on the free movement of the energy, minerals and goods that power our economies and secure our nations. Working together in this way strengthens not only our economies but our regional and global security, ensuring that no nation is left vulnerable and our adversaries cannot take unfair advantage. As President Trump has said, America’s foreign policy has two main goals: to ensure prosperity at home and peace abroad. We stand firmly with all nations that believe in and want to promote peace, freedom, democracy and economic prosperity. We urge every nation to stand with us and our allies to safeguard the world’s energy and natural resource supply, keeping it secure, reliable and affordable, so our shared prosperity cannot be threatened by malign adversaries. I resume my functions as President of the Council. I shall now give the floor to those members of the Council who wish to make statements.

Let me thank Under-Secretary-General DiCarlo for her insightful remarks. I thank you, Mr. President, for your presence here today and for shedding light on a topic that greatly affects instability and conflict around the world. Access to critical minerals and energy systems sits at the very heart of international peace and security. These minerals not only enable renewable technologies, digital infrastructure and modern industry; they are indispensable to the global energy transition, inclusive economic development and growth and global economic security. How they are managed today will shape whether they strengthen, or strain, global stability tomorrow. Conflict over natural resources is not new; from oil to water to critical minerals, resource pressures have shaped geopolitics for centuries. No region has been immune. However, in recent decades, these challenges have disproportionately affected Africa, in particular the Great Lakes region, the Sudan and the Sahel. The illicit exploitation of natural resources continues to fuel armed conflict, undermine State authority and devastate communities across the continent. At the same time, global supply chains, whether for critical minerals or energy exports and infrastructure, have increasingly been weaponized, threatening the prosperity, livelihoods and well-being of millions of civilians. Allow me to highlight three points. First, it is essential that countries rich in natural resources, including critical minerals, fully benefit from their own wealth. Such wealth should drive local economic growth, facilitate economic diversification and support inclusive peace and sustainable development. To this end, dialogue among Governments and local populations, as well as with civil society and the private sector, is essential. Across borders, regional integration also plays a crucial role in harmonizing regulations, enabling the movement of persons and goods, facilitating cross-border infrastructure development and enhancing cooperation to prevent conflicts linked to resource exploitation. Secondly, Denmark believes that a key aspect of ensuring global energy security relies on joint efforts to reduce strategic dependencies on dominant suppliers and bolstering energy autonomy. Similarly, we oppose critical minerals being used as a tool for economic coercion. Collective action, through international partnerships and trade agreements, is therefore essential to ensure dependable and stable supply chains. For our part, Denmark focuses on supply chain resilience, in line with the European Union’s Critical Raw Materials Act, which focuses on minerals vital for the twin transition. We also see the green transition as crucial to building energy security and reducing possible competition. To this end, Denmark is working to secure, long-term renewable energy and clean technology sources. Thirdly, energy infrastructure remains a critical part of civilian infrastructure. Attacks on power grids and pipelines disrupt economies, undermine public services and impede the provision of basic humanitarian needs. We are seeing this unfold in many parts of the world, including in the Middle East and Africa. And for four years now, we have witnessed in Ukraine how Russian attacks on critical energy infrastructure have had devastating humanitarian consequences for the civilian population. Civilian infrastructure must be protected, in accordance with international humanitarian law. Further, it must be made more resilient to both conflict-related and climate-related risks. In conclusion, natural resources have long shaped the dynamics of conflict. Around the world, we are seeing that these stakes are rising once again. At the United Nations, and in particular around this table, we have a shared responsibility to ensure that these resources become a foundation for progress and peace, not a source of division. That means supporting responsible and sustainable natural resource management. It means equitable benefit-sharing and the protection of energy infrastructure. In short, in means prioritizing cooperation over conflict. Denmark stands ready to support all efforts to that end.

I welcome and thank you, Mr. President, Secretary of Energy of the United States, and I thank Ms. Rosemary DiCarlo for her valuable briefing. I also thank the United States of America for convening this meeting, which sheds light on the growing relationship between energy, critical metals and global supply chains and its direct impact on international peace and security. Critical minerals are a key pillar in building the modern economy and enhancing the capabilities of countries in various strategic fields that underpin economic and modern technological transformations aimed at energy security and industries with a strategic dimension. Competition for these resources has become an issue with intertwined geopolitical and economic dimensions, which requires the international community to work to ensure that critical minerals contribute to stability and development rather than becoming a factor of tension or conflict. In this context, the Kingdom of Bahrain stresses the importance of consolidating the principles of responsible and sustainable management of natural resources and enhancing transparency and international cooperation in regulating supply chains to reduce the risks of the monopoly, politicization or disruption of markets, so as to establish a safe, sustainable and affordable global market. Based on its commitment to enhancing energy security and the continuity and stability of global supply chains, the Kingdom of Bahrain affirms its involvement in several relevant international and regional initiatives and agreements, in addition to concluding numerous bilateral agreements for cooperation in the field of energy exploration and production, the latest of which was the signing of the cooperation framework in the field of critical minerals with the United States. The Kingdom of Bahrain also emphasizes the pivotal role played by the International Seabed Authority, established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, in regulating the exploration and exploitation of mineral resources in the deep seabed in areas beyond national jurisdiction. This provides a legal framework that balances the peaceful and sustainable use of marine resources, the protection of the marine environment, the prevention of conflicts and the promotion of international peace and security. Energy security and supply chains are closely linked to the security of international maritime corridors and critical infrastructure. In this context, the Kingdom of Bahrain would like to refer to the statement of the Ministerial Council of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which condemned in the strongest terms the evil and unjustified Iranian aggression targeting the GCC countries and a number of sister Arab countries and stressed the need for these attacks to cease immediately in order to restore security, peace and stability to the region. It also stressed the importance of maintaining air and maritime security and the safety of waterways in the region and of ensuring the stability of global supply chains and energy markets. Iran persists in undermining global security and stability by threatening freedom of navigation, attempting to close the Strait of Hormuz and targeting oil tankers and energy infrastructure. Iran’s actions include documented incidents in which various vital facilities in my country and in the region have been targeted. In its relevant resolutions, in particular resolution 552 (1984), the Security Council has affirmed its condemnation of attacks on commercial vessels and the need to ensure the security of international navigation. This is consistent with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Any disruption to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz would severely disrupt energy prices and global markets, increase unstable competition for resources and adversely affect the international economy as a whole, especially given that approximately 20 per cent of oil supplies pass through this vital corridor. In conclusion, we call on the international community to condemn and strongly denounce these attacks, given their serious implications for regional and international peace, and we urgently call for robust international cooperation to ensure the protection of vital corridors and strategic infrastructure. Vital resources should not be a source of conflict or exploitation. My country affirms its support for entrenching the principles of international law and respect for the sovereignty of States, given their vital importance in avoiding escalation and maintaining regional and international peace.

I would like to commend the presidency for convening this timely meeting and to thank the United States Secretary of State for presiding over it. Your participation here today, Mr. President, shows the importance that you attach to this subject. I would also like to thank the Under-Secretary-General, Ms. DiCarlo, for her briefing today. Allow me to emphasize the following three points. First, in an era of geopolitical tensions, technological transformation and climate change, countries around the globe are facing challenges in gaining access to affordable energy. The diversification of energy sources — gas, oil and critical minerals — and energy supply can lead to energy autonomy and thereby to energy security and economic stability. Secure, reliable, affordable and sustainable access to all fuel and energy sources is vital. Maritime security is of equal importance, as a secure maritime domain is essential to the safety of global supply chains, energy security and economic stability, including price stability. The disruption of key maritime routes can also raise costs and cause greater environmental impact. Amid rapidly changing energy dynamics, Greece is emerging as a valuable transit country for European markets by providing diversified energy sources and routes. Our main goal is to enhance energy security through multiple, alternative, cost-efficient and competitive energy interconnections. Greece aims to become both an energy hub and a key transit country, starting with natural gas and electricity. In Europe, after Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, reducing reliance on Russian energy has been key, and Greece has been contributing to this end, including through the Vertical Corridor. Secondly, Greece stands firmly behind the European Union (EU) in its drive for strategic autonomy in energy, reducing its dependency on single sources, and it is poised to play a pivotal role in the EU’s endeavour of diversifying and building resilient supply chains. This also highlights the importance of developing secure, diversified and sustainable connectivity corridors, including such initiatives as the India-Middle East- Europe economic corridor, which can facilitate the safe and reliable transport of energy resources and critical minerals across regions. Thirdly, the global race for critical minerals presents a complex mix of opportunities and risks, affecting the geopolitical landscape and security around the world. Critical minerals and their undisrupted supply are equally vital for the global transition to clean energy technologies and technological advancements, such as renewable energy sources like solar and wind power, electric vehicles and so forth. However, if not managed well and with transparency and accountability, their extraction and trade can fuel existing conflicts and trigger new ones. Therefore, the systematic illicit exploitation and trafficking of critical minerals, wherever these occur, can exacerbate inequalities, insecurity and instability and can threaten the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of several States in the world. As a country with mineral resources reserves and significant extraction and processing capability, Greece is determined to build further on our geological endowment through our robust national programme for critical raw materials research. We stand ready to coordinate and cooperate with other Member States, sectors and institutions in order to address today’s challenges in all the aforementioned sectors, with a view to ensuring energy security, minimizing vulnerabilities and risks, consolidating economic stability, growth and development and, hopefully, to contributing to international prosperity, peace and security.

I would like to thank Under- Secretary-General Rosemary DiCarlo for her briefing. I would also like to thank the United States presidency for inviting the Security Council to discuss issues related to energy and critical minerals. A few months ago, an Arria formula meeting organized at the initiative of Sierra Leone allowed us to begin exploring these issues. It is important for the Council to address these issues, as they pose threats to international peace and security. Competition for control of these resources is indeed a factor in conflict and instability and a source of revenue to fuel them. We see this in Africa, where the continent’s immense wealth is preyed upon by armed groups, which exploit it to finance their activities or arrange for it to be plundered on behalf of Powers outside the continent. This monopolization of resources by armed groups fuels violence, prolongs conflicts and perpetuates the suffering of civilian populations. This is the case in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where the Mouvement du 23 mars controls 15 to 30 per cent of global coltan production and finances its expansion with the proceeds thereof. In the longer term, these acts of plunder hinder the economic and social development of States, deprived of the wealth of their own soil. Energy is also used as a tool of coercion and as a weapon in conflicts. In its war of aggression against Ukraine, now in its fifth year, Russia is resorting to indiscriminate strikes against the energy network and infrastructure, intentionally seeking to provoke a humanitarian crisis in the heart of winter. Russia is also seeking to seize control of Ukrainian energy infrastructure through its illegal and irresponsible occupation of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. We reaffirm Ukraine’s full sovereignty and ownership of the Zaporizhzhia power plant, as well as of the rest of its territory. We once again call on Russia to stop jeopardizing the safety and security of this power plant and to return full control over it to Ukraine, in respect of Ukraine’s sovereignty. Beyond that, the issue of security of supplies is a test of the resilience of our societies and economies, which are dependent on carbon-free energy sources and critical minerals for their ecological transition, industrialization and digital transformation. We are concerned about the development of unfair practices in the field of critical minerals, such as market manipulation aimed at disrupting supplies, creating shortages and undermining the development of projects to diversify global value chains. Such practices can affect the stability of our economies and even our security interests. To address all of these challenges, I would like to propose a few courses of action. First, we must ensure the fair and sustainable use of critical energy and mineral resources, within the framework of balanced partnerships and with respect for the sovereignty of States, which must be able to benefit from their wealth for their development. This requires the private sector to be held accountable, ensuring the traceability of critical minerals and not including looted minerals in the manufacture of its products. In this regard, France supports the implementation of the European regulation re-establishing due diligence obligations for importers of critical minerals and metals from conflict zones. In 2021, France joined the European Partnership for Responsible Minerals, which brings together European States, businesses and civil society organizations to finance and monitor development projects. Ambitious development action, designed in collaboration with the private sector, is essential to help mineral-producing countries move up the value chain, while ensuring social and environmental impacts are taken into account, and to develop their autonomy in this area. France also supports greater engagement by multilateral development institutions in the energy sector, including civil nuclear power, in order to respond more directly to the challenges of mass electrification in developing countries. Secondly, efforts must also continue to achieve energy independence through the development of a diversified and decarbonized energy mix, including civil nuclear power. France intends to play a leading role in this area and will host a global nuclear energy summit in Paris on 10 March, in close cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. This summit will enable progress to be made towards tripling the world’s installed civil nuclear capacity, a goal that France supports and that was announced in 2023, on the margins of the twenty-eighth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Finally, it is important to establish secure, sustainable, resilient and diversified supply chains for critical minerals, ensuring economic stability and reducing the risk of international tensions. To this end, the French presidency of the Group of Seven will focus on implementing the Critical Mineral Action Plan and the Roadmap to Promote Standards-based Markets for Critical Minerals, both of which were adopted last year in Kananaskis. We must work with producer countries and the private sector to establish diversified supply chains based on transparent market mechanisms and responsible mining practices in order to promote prosperity and security for all.

At the outset, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome you here today, Mr. President, in your capacity as United States Secretary of Energy, and to thank Under-Secretary- General Rosemary DiCarlo for her briefing earlier today. In a world undergoing energy and digital transitions, and at a time when the race for strategic minerals is accelerating, the Democratic Republic of Congo could only support the initiative taken by the United States of America to place on the Security Council’s agenda a topic that is of particular existential importance to my country. As a country with immense reserves of strategic minerals that are essential to modern technologies and the global energy transition, the Democratic Republic of the Congo is at the very heart of this global issue. However, these resources, which should be a powerful lever for development and prosperity for our populations, have mainly aroused considerable greed, which has contributed to fuelling persistent cycles of violence in certain regions of our territory. The twenty-first century has been marked by the emergence of strategic mineral resources, notably cobalt, coltan, lithium, gold and rare earth elements, which have become essential pillars of the technological and energy transformations of our time. This dynamic also comes with growing risks to international peace and security. In certain fragile contexts, competition for control of natural resources fuels cycles of violence and contributes to the emergence of a veritable war economy. Illegal artisanal mining, informal taxation and cross-border smuggling networks enable certain armed groups to finance their activities and sustain protracted conflicts. My country is a perfect illustration of this. For nearly three decades, the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has been the scene of persistent violence, largely fuelled by the illegal exploitation and trade of natural resources. This situation has plunged millions of civilians into chronic insecurity, caused massive population displacement and permanently weakened economic and social structures. We therefore thank the United States for having aptly imposed targeted sanctions against the troublemakers in the Great Lakes region, namely the Rwanda Defence Force and their proxy forces, the Mouvement du 23 mars. In certain areas that are rich in strategic minerals essential to the global energy transition and advanced technologies, civilian populations remain particularly vulnerable to violence and abuse. Several reports by United Nations experts have established a direct link between the illegal exploitation of natural resources and the persistence of armed conflict in this region. Moreover, the correlation between natural resources and armed conflict is evident in several regions of the world. In certain areas of the Sahel, the Middle East and Latin America, competition for control of strategic resources — whether hydrocarbons, minerals or other natural resources — continues to fuel tensions and undermine regional stability. These dynamics also contribute to cross-border destabilization, particularly through refugee flows, organized crime, human rights violations and the militarization of areas rich in natural resources. They demonstrate that the governance of natural resources is now a key issue for the maintenance of international peace and security. In the light of these challenges, it is essential to promote responsible, transparent and inclusive governance of mineral resources. It is crucial that producing countries be able to exercise full sovereignty over their subsoil resources, while ensuring that their use genuinely contributes to the economic and social development of their populations. With that in mind, several priorities are worth highlighting: strengthening the traceability and transparency of mineral supply chains; promoting local value creation, particularly through mineral processing in producing countries; and effectively combating fraud, smuggling and the illegal exploitation of natural resources. The Democratic Republic of the Congo is not tackling the issue exclusively from a stocktaking perspective. It is already actively involved in a number of initiatives aimed at transparency and natural resource governance. In this respect, my country is participating in, inter alia, the Kimberley Process for diamond traceability and a regional certification mechanism instituted by the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR). The ICGLR applies the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s reasonable diligence principles for mineral supply chains. These initiatives show that concrete instruments capable of promoting the responsible exploitation of natural resources already exist. They could serve as an effective basis for bolstering a more coherent and more effective international framework to prevent natural resources from being used to fund conflicts. In conclusion, the following must be underscored. First, the private sector plays an indispensable role in the mining industry and global supply chains. In that respect, its involvement must align with scrupulous compliance with national legislation and principles of social and environmental responsibility. Secondly, businesses operating in the sector must ensure that their activities do not in any way contribute to the financing of armed groups or the illegal exploitation of natural resources. Likewise, they must contribute to sustainable development in the countries in which they operate, in particular through the technology transfer, local human resources training and the implementation of community development projects. Thirdly, at a time when the world is undergoing a major energy transformation, it is paramount for that transition not to replicate the injustices of the past. Fourthly, the energy transition will be genuinely sustainable only if it is also fair, responsible and beneficial for the people of the countries that produce those resources. Lastly, the Democratic Republic of the Congo reiterates its willingness to work with all of its partners in order to promote the fair, transparent and responsible governance of natural resources that promotes peace, security and sustainable development.

Panama welcomes the convening of this meeting and appreciates the fact that Chris Wright, Secretary of Energy of the United States, is presiding over it. Our gratitude extends to Ms. Rosemary DiCarlo, Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, for her valuable input. Energy security is now increasingly affecting geopolitical dynamics and global economic relations. For decades, competition for natural resources and critical minerals has shaped global trade and international politics. While mineral extraction has brought significant technological, medical and economic progress, it has also brought about insecurity on multiple levels in certain regions. When communities living in resource- rich territories do not duly enjoy the development that those resources create, inequality grows and cycles of violence are fuelled by recruitment into armed groups and criminal and drug trafficking networks. The interrelationship between exploitation, smuggling and support for armed groups is clear. In some regions, the territorial control exerted by such armed groups goes hand in hand with illegal mining, and the ensuing profits are often siphoned off into transnational organized crime. Weak institutions and poor regulation compound this problem, entailing the risk of these mineral resources and the resulting economic benefits being seized by political and/or military elites. At the same time, when external actors seek to extract those resources for their own gain, some of them ultimately inflame polarization and stoke conflict further. As a result, families are forced to abandon their homes in search of a better life, thus increasing migration flows. Panama, as a country of transit, has at times been affected by such irregular migration flows. Accordingly, in our view, it is necessary to address the root causes of insecurity, which often lie in geopolitical competition for energy sources and critical minerals. As a country with considerable logistical and commercial experience and on account of the Panama Canal — a maritime corridor that accommodates extensive transit of materials and product — we understand the importance of facilitating and safeguarding the free and secure flow of the energy and minerals market worldwide. That supply chain flow must be governed by international law. It is imperative to abide by World Trade Organization rules and ensure that there are consequences for those who facilitate or profit from illegal energy flows and for those who, by impeding critical flows, jeopardize human security and global trade. Equality under international law dictates that the same applies to those who seek to twist interpretations of that law or use coercion to satisfy particular commercial interests at the expense of development and welfare at the regional and global levels. Illegal extraction, especially beneath the seas, does irreversible damage to the environment, human health and the livelihoods that sustain health. In line with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the associated multilateral instruments, Panama underscores the importance of an orderly and equitable regime for the extraction of critical minerals from the oceans, with particular attention afforded to the protection of the marine ecosystem. As an international community, do we really want to be on course for economic development that, while being very lucrative for some in the short-term is unsustainable for future generations? The recommendations of the United Nations Panel on Critical Energy Transition Minerals point to the need to strengthen global governance so as to ensure that the energy transition is not underpinned by pre-existing inequalities, nor reverts to replicating land appropriation and forced displacement dynamics through cycles of violence in the global South. In that connection, States’ permanent sovereignty over natural resources must be exercised in a responsible and transparent fashion and in strict compliance with national and international standards. Through meaningful international cooperation, critical minerals could become established drivers of sustainable development and shared prosperity, not catalysts of instability or conflict. There is an urgent need to strengthen mechanisms for inclusive governance and traceability, to enforce international standards and to promote fair trade schemes that ensure that commensurate profits go to producing countries. The ministerial conference recently held in Washington, D.C., underscored how central mineral resources are to the energy transition. Scientific and technological progress and current market demands require the extraction of minerals. Nonetheless, it is our responsibility to ensure that any development that arises is sustainable and puts people first, while taking into account those living where energy resources are found, including Indigenous Peoples and relevant stakeholders. Given the close interrelationship between the energy sectors and critical minerals, it is worth discussing how and to what extent it is possible to regulate extraction activities so that we can strike a balance among economic development, environmental protection and social well-being.

I welcome you, Mr. President, as you preside over today’s meeting, and I thank Under-Secretary-General DiCarlo for her briefing. At present, as the global energy transition is accelerating, emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence are advancing rapidly, while demand for critical minerals and other resources continues to rise. As the world enters a new period of turbulence and transformation, imbalances in the supply and demand of energy, critical minerals and other resources are becoming increasingly pronounced. The international community must enhance solidarity and cooperation to jointly foster stable and resilient resource supply and industrial chains, thereby supporting global economic growth. Allow me to make three points. First, we must foster an enabling environment for safeguarding supply chain security. Rising global geopolitical tensions and conflicts in resource-rich regions such as the Middle East and Africa are disrupting the production and transportation of energy and critical minerals. China has consistently advocated that all parties should abide by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, refrain from the use or threat of force in international relations, resolve disputes peacefully through dialogue and consultation, safeguard energy, critical minerals and other non-military targets and ensure the safety and uninterrupted flow of shipping lanes. The situation in the Middle East is deeply concerning. China urges all parties to immediately cease military actions, refrain from further escalating tensions and prevent regional instability from adversely affecting the global economy. The international community must collectively support countries, particularly in Africa, in addressing persistent challenges, such as mineral- induced instability, curbing the illegal smuggling and mining of critical minerals and tackling the underlying drivers of armed conflicts. Secondly, we must fully respect the sovereignty of all nations over their natural resources. In accordance with the principles of international law, each country exercises absolute sovereignty over the resources within its territory and bears primary responsibility for governance. Certain countries should abandon outdated colonialist thinking, fully respect the development paths and policy choices of other countries and engage in business cooperation based on equality and mutual benefit. They must not, for self-interest, seize resources from other countries through various means, even resorting to military force to exert pressure or coercion. The international community should support developing countries in fully leveraging their resource endowments to foster economic development and improve the well-being of their populations. Developing countries should not be permanently confined to the low end of industrial chains, and the current unfair and unreasonable arrangement must be addressed. Thirdly, we must consistently uphold openness, cooperation and mutual benefit. The global distribution of energy and critical minerals is highly uneven, making mismatches between resource supply and industrial development demand inevitable. Countries should embrace the concept of building a community with a shared future for humankind, strengthen policy dialogue and industrial coordination, maintain a fair and transparent economic and trade order, establish inclusive and open supply chain systems and promote mutually beneficial cooperation and the peaceful utilization of resources. All countries, regardless of size or strength, have the right to participate equally in global mineral cooperation and rule-making. Certain countries must not overstate security concerns or politicize or weaponize issues related to energy and critical minerals. They should refrain from adopting the cold war mentality, fostering bloc confrontations or creating exclusive, geopolitically motivated small circles. The formation and development of global industrial and supply chains are the outcomes of economic globalization and market forces with historical and objective foundations. Political manipulation or artificial intervention will only further disrupt global markets, undermine international cooperation and ultimately be counterproductive for those who engage in such practices. China is the world’s largest producer, consumer and trader of mineral products. It has consistently been committed to responsible mining, open trade and mutually beneficial cooperation, playing a constructive and positive role in the supply of critical minerals. At the twentieth Group of 20 Summit, China proposed the international economic and trade cooperation initiative on green mining and minerals, aimed at promoting the green transformation and sustainable development of the global mining sector and jointly safeguarding a stable, mutually beneficial, fair and equitable global green mining production and supply chain. China welcomes all parties to actively participate in and support this initiative. China will continue to advance high-level openness with unwavering determination, fully leverage its mineral reserves and technological strength, enhance dialogue and communication, foster complementarity with more countries and build a closer network of cooperation, thereby making greater contributions to the stability of global industrial and supply chains.

Let me welcome you, Mr. President, to the Security Council and thank the United States for putting this important issue on our agenda. I also thank Under-Secretary-General DiCarlo for briefing us today. As has been said already, competition for natural resources has long been a driver of conflict. And yet, lasting economic growth and prosperity require expansion of supply and a successful transition to sustainable sources of clean and renewable energy. Critical minerals are central to the global energy transition, economic resilience and modern technology. I will make three further points. First, as supply chains for critical minerals become more concentrated, competition for these resources is driving geopolitical tension and creating exposure to coercion and disruption. Global demand is rising rapidly. Meeting this demand has the potential to reshape economies but also requires responsible management of risks. Minerals-driven growth is not automatically stabilizing, and in fragile contexts, mineral revenues can finance armed groups and military actors, deepen corruption and undermine trust in institutions. Ms. DiCarlo highlighted some of the issues that arise, for example, in the Great Lakes region. And yet, when done well, critical minerals development can and should be responsible and sustainable, supporting growth, jobs and environmental protection in producing countries. Secondly, conflict-sensitive investment in critical minerals is essential. This means understanding conflict dynamics, maintaining dialogue with communities and, where appropriate, formalizing artisanal mining. Any shift to industrial mining must ensure that communities see the benefits through jobs, energy access and economic opportunity. Good governance is also an essential element. Mineral development must respect national ownership, ensure transparent contracts and fair taxation and apply high environmental, social and governance standards. Benefit‑sharing must be clear and tangible. Thirdly, partnerships are key to meeting global demand in a responsible, sustainable way. The United Kingdom is committed to a partnerships-based approach to promoting responsible, diversified supply chains. We are proud to be helping international partners leverage their mineral resources for inclusive growth. For example, the Vale Base Metals refinery in Wales plays a critical role within a globally integrated network, processing nickel that originates from Indonesia and Canada and undergoes intermediary processing in Japan or Canada before being imported to the United Kingdom for final processing. Partnerships with the private sector are also essential for mobilizing capital at scale to unlock responsible investment in critical minerals. Coordination across sovereign funds, export credits and private finance can help manage risk and ensure that today’s supply solutions do not become tomorrow’s conflict drivers. The United Kingdom stands ready to work with partners to ensure that critical minerals are a source of stability and not insecurity.

At the outset, I wish to thank the United States, as President of the Council, for convening this meeting, and I extend my appreciation to Secretary Wright for being with us today. I also thank Under-Secretary-General DiCarlo for her briefing. Energy and international security are intrinsically linked. For most people, the cost of global instability becomes visible at the gas station or in their monthly energy bill. Also, rising energy prices lead to higher food prices, with direct consequences for food security for the most vulnerable populations. Conflict and natural resources are similarly connected. Countries rich in natural resources know all too well that a blessing can often become a curse. Allow me to make three points. First, in war and conflict, energy can be both target and weapon. Civilian energy infrastructure is often a cynical target of choice. Energy supplies can become powerful tools of coercion. This is starkly illustrated by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, in which Russia is systematically attacking Ukraine’s energy system, depriving civilians of electricity and heating in the coldest winter and recklessly targeting nuclear power plants. For Russia, energy also serves another purpose: it fills its war chest. And for decades, Russia has used energy supplies to exert political pressure on countries that have developed an overreliance on them. For that, there is a solution: it is stopping such dependencies, as my country has done, and diversifying supplies by strengthening ties with reliable suppliers and deploying renewable energy. The latter serves the dual objective of promoting energy security and addressing climate change, which is one of the defining challenges of our time. This brings me to my second point. The clean energy transition and digital transformation that embrace advanced technologies increase global demand for critical minerals — we all know that. Securing access to these minerals is marked by competition, but competition should follow rules too. Dominant positions should not be abused. Resilient critical mineral supply chains need to be based on the principles of transparency, diversification, reliability and sustainable mining practices. Critical minerals should make a transformative future possible, not perpetuate conflict. This is my final point. In too many places, ruthless competition for natural resources has been a driver of armed conflict, crime and corruption. Instead of sustainable livelihoods, it often results in hazardous labour conditions. Instead of sound stewardship of land, it leads to extensive deforestation and loss of biodiversity. For critical mineral production to benefit local, sustainable and resilient development, such production requires appropriate legal and tax frameworks, investments and good governance. Resource-rich developing countries need to be supported in this regard, and Under-Secretary-General DiCarlo described the United Nations system’s efforts to that end in her briefing. Adherence to established environmental, social and government standards and due diligence frameworks, such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Due Diligence Guidance for Meaningful Stakeholder Engagement in the Extractives Sector, should be promoted among governments and the private sector alike. The meaningful engagement of local communities is essential to protect their rights, address grievances and ensure accountability. The challenge is not new, but the urgency is pressing. A commitment to the faithful implementation of already-established standards can help mitigate critical mineral supply chain risks. It should be recognized that the race for profit at the expense of the local population and their economic prosperity, human rights and environmental sustainability eventually backfires. When communities thrive, supply chains endure. Therefore, let us — all of us — make responsible action the standard, not the exception.

We welcome your presence, Mr. President, and your presiding over this Council meeting. We also thank Under-Secretary-General Rosemary DiCarlo for her useful briefing. Access to affordable, reliable and sustainable energy is essential for development, stability and prosperity. The global transition towards renewable energy, electric mobility, battery storage, advanced manufacturing, digital infrastructure and grid modernization has sharply increased the demand for critical minerals. This upsurge has generated new geopolitical and geoeconomic pressures. If not managed responsibly, competition over natural resources can affect supply chains, aggravate tensions, undermine sovereignty and contribute to instability. Experience shows that where mineral wealth intersects with weak governance, entrenched poverty and external interference, the risks of instability increase. In several conflict-affected settings, illicit extraction, trafficking networks and opaque financial flows have fuelled armed conflict and violence, weakened State institutions and deprived populations of legitimate revenues. The scramble for natural resources and its linkage to conflict and instability are, therefore, not new phenomena. It will be good to change course. Pakistan believes that natural resources must serve as instruments of economic development and shared prosperity, and not of coercion or conflict. This applies equally to water, the most critical of natural resources. In particular, shared water resources are indispensable for sustaining life and for sustainable development and prosperity. We reject the weaponization of water to choke this lifeline for lower-riparian countries, also threatening regional peace, security and stability. Pakistan itself is confronted with water terrorism by India, which has resorted to the unilateral and unlawful action of putting in abeyance the Indus Waters Treaty 1960 between the Government of India, the Government of Pakistan and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, in violation of international law and the provisions of that Treaty. The international community must impress upon India the need to return to full compliance with the Indus Waters Treaty, which, by the way, remains valid and in force, as per the August 2025 award of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The production of and trade in critical minerals must respect national ownership, domestic priorities and the right of developing countries to pursue value addition and industrialization, with a view to transforming them from mere raw material exporters to integrated hubs for processing and refining. The concentration of critical mineral supply chains, price volatility, export restrictions and geopolitical competition are creating new vulnerabilities in global energy and the economic security framework. Efforts to secure supply must not devolve into bloc politics, economic coercion or exclusionary arrangements, thereby ensuring that supply chain diversification does not become a tool for geopolitical containment. The fragmentation of global markets will undermine both energy transition objectives and collective security. In this context, we would like to emphasize the following points. First, we must reaffirm the right of peoples to permanent sovereignty over their natural resources, which remains a foundational principle of international law, also enshrined in General Assembly resolution 1803 (XVII). All partnerships in the critical minerals sector must be cooperative and not exploitative, respect national ownership, ensure transparent contractual arrangements and align with host countries’ development strategies. Secondly, in order to prevent the exploitation of mineral-producing countries and regions, in particular in fragile and conflict-affected settings, there is a need to support their capacity-building for strengthening domestic regulatory institutions, combating illicit financial flows, ensuring environmental safeguards and promoting equitable benefit-sharing with local communities. Thirdly, we must promote equitable participation in global value chains. Developing countries must be enabled to move beyond extraction towards processing, refining and downstream manufacturing. Technology transfer, skills development and responsible investment are essential to avoid perpetuating structural imbalances. Fourthly, we must preserve an open, predictable, non-discriminatory international trading system. Supply chain diversification should enhance resilience, not entrench divisions. Multilateral cooperation, rather than unilateral measures, remains the most credible path to energy security. Fifthly, we must ensure that the private sector and global corporations participate in this endeavour responsibly. Investor-State dispute settlement procedures must be fair and equitable, without causing any undue burden on developing nations. In this era of technological transformation, the governance of energy and critical mineral must remain firmly anchored in the Charter of the United Nations and international law. Managed in accordance with these principles, these resources can drive sustainable development and shared global prosperity. Mismanaged or exploited, they risk deepening inequalities and intensifying geopolitical tensions. Pakistan is committed to the responsible development of its energy and mineral resources. The Government of Pakistan has launched targeted initiatives to accelerate the exploration and development of critical minerals. We are strengthening our regulatory frameworks, modernizing geological mapping, improving licensing transparency and promoting environmentally responsible mining practices. Our objective is to ensure that our resource potential translates into industrial growth and social development. Pakistan stands ready to work with all members of the Council and beyond to ensure that critical minerals become catalysts for sustainable development, progress and stability.

The topic chosen by the presidency for today’s meeting is one of the most pressing issues on the international agenda. The desire for enrichment at the expense of the resources of other countries has posed the threat of conflicts and wars for centuries, and humanity has not managed to cure itself of this disease. Today, we have been invited to discuss, in particular, one of the key resources of the future — the so-called “critical minerals”. However, the topic of conflicts, for example, in the pursuit of oil and gas, has clearly not yet been exhausted. And if we dig even deeper to when human lives were also considered resources, we believe that the discussion about the consequences of the slave trade and colonialism is not yet over. But let us get back to minerals. Critical minerals are not just a commodities or resources; they are part of the foundation of the emerging world economic order. Many people today have already spoken about this. Rapid technological progress, the development of artificial intelligence and the rise in energy consumption, including by data processing centres, are driving a galloping demand for critical raw materials. What are we hearing from our Western colleagues in this regard? We are hearing proclamations about the need to ensure the traceability and transparency of supply chains. What does this mean in practice? Quite a few countries have already seen this for themselves as it relates to other resources. In practice, it is an attempt to establish external control over the industry by ensuring that Western consumers are the primary beneficiaries of supply chains and by imposing customized pricing. At the same time, the human rights and climate agendas are widely used in order to divide countries into “judges” and “the accused”, in order to demand that the latter sell off their resources for a pittance. As for the Group of Seven (G7), it unabashedly calls itself a buyers club. We consider the G7 thematic Critical Minerals Action Plan, adopted in June in Canada, to be a particularly vivid example of all of these approaches. The colonial logic of securing extracting countries as a resource base can be clearly seen there. In exchange for inclusion in Western algorithms, resource-rich countries are given the all-too-familiar standard promises of capital investment and technology transfer. However, real investment has been and will continue to be directed only towards the infrastructure that ensures the export of the commodities in question. In the face of intensified competition over minerals, the West seeks to develop value-added capacities in its own jurisdictions, and the technologies they provide are “catch-up technologies”, at best. Against that backdrop, holding this thematic Council meeting is an unambiguous signal to resource-rich countries about what awaits them if they are recalcitrant in negotiations. At the same time, key tools for so-called “doing business” have already been implemented or are waiting in the wings. I am referring to interference in internal affairs of States and technologies for toppling undesirable regimes, unilateral restrictive measures circumventing the Security Council and other violations of international law that are incompatible with the principles of international relations on an equal footing, as well as free trade and fair competition. It should be emphasized that reproducing colonial models built on the seizure of resource rents without the full development of the extractive States risks not only entrenching but also increasing many times over the potential for global conflict, adding a new front for confrontation to the struggle for conventional resources. Access to reliable energy sources and energy security guarantees are the foundation for economic development, social stability and prosperity. On the contrary, the transformation of energy into a weapon of geopolitical and economic pressure nullifies technological achievements. Unfortunately, we are witnessing competitors in the energy sector being harshly eliminated, unilateral sanctions being imposed on the energy companies of competing countries, critical cross- border infrastructure being sabotaged and other illegal actions being carried out, including the seizure of ships in violation of the freedom of the high seas. This is breaking down energy supply chains, eroding contractual obligations, increasing the cost of living and intensifying global and regional instability. Countries are being forced to search for new ways to ensure their energy security. However, it is quite possible to avoid such a scenario, and many have spoken about this today in the Chamber. This is possible if we respect the principles of equal partnership and take on board the interests of all participants. If we were to do that, this sphere could foster the sustainable development and prosperity of States, primarily those belonging to the global majority, including producing countries. Mineral wealth should be the bedrock of socioeconomic stability and development. It is necessary to respect the sovereign right of States to independently determine the models for regulating and extracting their natural resources throughout the entire value chain, from geological exploration to bringing the end products to market. Such a state of affairs can be achieved by ensuring that countries supplying critical raw materials participate in global chains on an equal footing. This, in turn, requires a long- overdue reform of international trade rules and a revision of the investment agreement architecture so that the States where extraction takes place can not only effectively develop their own processing capabilities but also gain access to cutting-edge technologies and financing on the basis of genuine partnership. In this regard, we welcome last year’s discussion of precisely such approaches at the BRICS summit in Rio de Janeiro, at which countries agreed to strengthen cooperation in the extraction and processing of critical resources. Russia is a responsible participant in international economic relations and is one of the largest exporters of energy resources, making a significant contribution to global energy security. We actively engage with those who are interested in mutually respectful cooperation. We are promoting the aforementioned approaches in international forums. We regard as unacceptable any politicized attempts to diminish the importance and role of hydrocarbon resources in the global energy matrix and the forced abandonment of conventional fuels in favour of green protectionism. At the same time, we will continue to prioritize access to inexpensive, reliable, sustainable and modern energy sources, taking environmental factors into consideration, and we acknowledge the importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In this regard, we advocate the principle of technological neutrality, whereby there is no discrimination against energy sources that have similar greenhouse gas emission characteristics, including natural gas and nuclear energy.

At the outset, Somalia wishes to thank the United States for convening this meeting and Secretary Wright for presiding over today’s important discussion. We also extend our appreciation to Under-Secretary-General DiCarlo for her comprehensive briefing. Today, the world stands at a historical crossroads. The global energy landscape is shifting rapidly from an oil-based system to one increasingly anchored in critical minerals. It is important to recognize that the majority of these reserves are concentrated in the global South, especially across the African continent, and that this is a source of insecurity and underdevelopment. These minerals are now indispensable to the technologies that will shape the future: renewable energy, advanced manufacturing and digital innovation. Yet, as history has shown, a shift in resources does not guarantee stability or prosperity. This transition does not simply trade old risks for new ones. It brings a new era of complexity and volatility. Competition for critical minerals is already generating tensions, with resource-rich regions, especially in Africa, too often enduring cycles of instability, environmental degradation and limited local benefit. For Africa, this debate is about more than market dynamics. It is about sovereignty. It is about stability. It is about ensuring our peoples’ right to economic opportunity. Africa holds roughly one third of the world’s critical mineral reserves. But for too long, Africa’s wealth and that of the global South have not translated into tangible improvements in the lives of the people. We cannot allow the extractive models of the past, which were focused on the removal and the export of raw materials, with little local value added, to be repeated. History makes clear that extraction without genuine development and local ownership breeds grievances and instability, not peace. For resources to support peace, their development must honour the sovereignty and aspirations of African nations and all countries of the global South. The Security Council has a vital role in guiding this new era of mineral competition towards a foundation for sovereignty, prosperity and lasting peace. We believe three priorities are essential. First, there must be a collective commitment to transparency and responsible supply chains. Weak international standards enable illicit trade and exploitation, undermining sovereignty and fuelling insecurity. Only through robust transparency, due diligence and fair benefit-sharing can mineral wealth serve both local communities and global stability. Secondly, we must encourage ethical public-private partnership. While the private sector drives investment and innovation, it must do so with respect for human rights and a long-term commitment to local development. Sustainable partnerships that build skills and industries in producing countries are key to resilient and inclusive economies. My final point is that regional and international cooperation must be deepened and made more equitable. The African Union’s Africa Mining Vision, the African Commodities Strategy and the Africa’s Green Minerals Strategy form the African road map for turning resource wealth into engines of sustainable development. Supporting these frameworks through harmonized regulations, infrastructure investment and knowledge-sharing will help to turn volatility into opportunity and ensure that the benefits are widely shared and sustainable peace is achieved. To conclude, the future of energy and technology will not be determined by access to minerals alone, but by the values and the choices guiding their extraction and use. The Council has a unique opportunity to ensure that the race for resources becomes a foundation for lasting peace, prosperity and dignity for all nations, especially those in the global South and Africa, where so much of the world’s mineral future will be decided. We remain committed to that endeavour.

I thank the United States for the initiative of convening this pertinent discussion and Under-Secretary-General DiCarlo for the valuable information and the thoughts imparted. Talk in the Council about energy, critical minerals and security confronts us with an inescapable reality: the climate crisis is an existential threat to humankind and a direct consequence of having based human progress on the indiscriminate use of fossil fuels. In the view of Colombia, this discussion forms part of a broader perspective, namely, one that entails the need to pursue peace with nature, while reconciling socioeconomic systems with the ecological limits of the planet. This involves the urgent decarbonization of the global economy and a just transition to clean energies. However, this transition cannot repeat the logics of extraction and inequality that marked the fossil era. The leap towards low-carbon technologies has increased the demand for critical minerals, generating new environmental, social and geopolitical tensions. Those minerals cannot become the new source of subordination for the countries that possess them. They must, first and foremost, serve the sovereign development of their peoples. Those nations rich in these resources must have priority access to and primary use of them so as to transform their own economies, close historical gaps and participate with dignity in the decarbonized global economy. Colombia believes in the potential of critical minerals as key elements for achieving sustainable development. They can and must be turned into direct benefits for the territories that produce them and those who live there, including Indigenous and Afrodescendent Peoples, moving away from dynamics that perpetuate inequality and exclusion. To do this, it is necessary to integrate social and environmental justice across the board, as well as the protection and conservation of biodiversity and human rights safeguards. Therefore, the best way to prevent the growing demand for critical minerals from becoming a new source of tension is to place their governance at the centre of the discussion. It is essential to promote public planning, international cooperation and the adoption of common standards that prioritize global public goods over exclusively commercial approaches. The work done by the United Nations Secretary-General’s Panel on Critical Energy Transition Minerals is a first step in that direction. Its calls for traceability, transparency, accountability and a comprehensive approach to human rights and environmental protection must be heeded. It is imperative that, together, we move towards establishing sustainability practices, such as comprehensive environmental and social impact assessments or traceability and transparency schemes with a cross-cutting human rights approach in their processing and commercialization. Having these standards, from extraction through to recycling, should not be a distant goal; ensuring that every step in the critical minerals cycle contributes to a truly just, sustainable and equitable transition among countries is our duty now. In turn, the main producers of critical minerals, mostly countries of the global South, must participate equitably in the digital economy and the global technological value chain. It is possible and necessary to develop an international cooperation paradigm that promotes the sustainable management of strategic technologies and resources, leading to more circular production models, rooted in the promotion of innovation and the transfer of knowledge, financing and technology to developing countries. At the same time, we must act decisively to stop the financial flows resulting from the illegal exploitation of natural resources and the criminal economies that surround them, which fuel conflicts and undermine the sovereignty of producing States. The international community must combat these networks with a comprehensive approach that combines traceability, judicial cooperation and the strengthening of institutions. Critical minerals must be a vector of sustainable development that contributes to international peace and security rather than a factor of unregulated competition or new geopolitical divisions. Colombia calls for the implementation of actions in a framework of equity that promotes a fair energy transition and a sustainable use of strategic resources. The answer must be more multilateralism, more shared rules and more international cooperation. As President Gustavo Petro has reiterated, without peace with the planet, there will be no peace among nations. The climate crisis will be resolved only by transforming the economic system that is producing it. That is the challenge we face today: ensuring that the energy transition is not a new phase of the same extractive model but rather the beginning of a global economy that prioritizes life, equity and the balance of the planet. That is, in essence, the peace with nature that Colombia is proposing to the world.

Liberia thanks the United States delegation for convening this important meeting on energy, critical minerals and their growing intersection with global stability. We thank Under-Secretary-General DiCarlo for her briefing. For many countries, energy and critical minerals are discussed primarily in terms of supply chains, industrial competitiveness and strategic resilience. Yet, for a number of resource-rich regions, particularly in parts of Africa, the conversation has historically been far more immediate; it has been about governance, stability and peace. As rightly pointed out by the Under-Secretary-General and other Member States, in several fragile contexts, mineral-rich landscapes have too often become arenas in which illicit extraction, weak regulatory oversight and armed activity intersect. From parts of the Sahel to regions of the Congo basin, natural resources that should support development have at times been diverted to finance instability. They have been used to weaken State institutions and deprive local communities of opportunity. My country understands these dynamics. During our own civil conflict, revenues from timber and diamonds contributed to the erosion of governance and to prolonged violence. The international community responded through sanctions and oversight mechanisms that helped create the space for reform. Today, Liberia remains firmly committed to ensuring that our natural resources — our forests and our minerals — serve as foundations for peace and sustainable development. Liberia also hosts more than 40 per cent of the remaining Upper Guinean Forest ecosystem — one of the world’s most significant biodiversity corridors and carbon sinks. These assets carry global environmental value, but they also support local livelihoods and national development. As the global transition toward clean energy accelerates demand for critical minerals — as the representatives of many Member States have pointed out — it is essential that producing countries experience tangible benefits from the resources found within their borders. The energy transition represents a historic opportunity. But if governance challenges are left unaddressed, it could also intensify pressures in regions in which institutions remain fragile. Preventing that outcome requires practical steps grounded in cooperation rather than confrontation. Liberia therefore offers five considerations for the Council and the wider international community. First, where relevant, it should be ensured that existing United Nations panels of experts continue to monitor and report on illicit mining activities, cross-border smuggling and the role of natural resources in financing armed groups. Transparent reporting has proven to be an effective early warning tool in situations in which resource exploitation intersects with conflict dynamics. Secondly, there is a need to encourage international initiatives that strengthen the traceability and responsible sourcing of critical minerals. Advances in digital certification and supply chain verification can help distinguish legally sourced minerals from those linked to illicit activity, reinforcing accountability across global markets. Thirdly, capacity-building for resource governance in producing States should be supported. Technical assistance aimed at strengthening regulatory institutions, improving concession management and combating illicit financial flows can significantly reduce the risk of natural resource wealth becoming a driver of instability. Fourthly, partnerships that promote responsible investment and greater value addition in mineral-producing countries should be encouraged. Expanding opportunities for processing, refining and related industries can help to ensure that mineral wealth contributes more directly to local employment and economic resilience. Fifthly, it is necessary to remain attentive to the protection of environmental assets and critical infrastructure, in particular forests and water resources, that are closely connected to mineral and energy systems. Damage to such assets during conflict not only harms ecosystems but also undermines long-term human security. It is time to put our resources where we are demonstrating concern. Liberia’s experience demonstrates that countries can emerge from resource-linked conflict and choose a different trajectory — one grounded in transparency, accountable governance and sustainable management of its natural wealth. Our forests must continue serving as a global climate asset, and our mineral resources must help to build schools, hospitals and energy infrastructure, not finance their destruction and instability. As global demand for critical minerals grows, the question before the international community must be not only how to secure supply, but also — and more importantly — how to ensure that the mineral economy contributes to stability rather than fragility. Responsible governance, equitable partnerships and preventive engagement will be essential to achieving this balance. Ultimately, the success of the global energy transition will not be measured solely by technological innovation. It will also be measured by whether the nations and communities in which these resources are found experience greater peace, resilience and shared prosperity. The minerals that power the technologies of tomorrow must also help to power peace today.

I shall now make a further statement in my capacity as Secretary of Energy of the United States. I heard so many thoughtful comments from representatives around the table today, for which I am thankful. However, I feel compelled to comment on the repeated use of the term “energy transition”. The United States has robust and rigorous efforts, investments and innovations in next-generation nuclear, in bringing fusion power to fruition, in next-generation geothermal technology and in advancing solar and energy storage. The United States believes in energy innovation and energy addition, but the United States also believes in math. Today fossil fuels provide a little more than 80 per cent of global primary energy, and the next largest source after oil, coal and natural gas is wood. I could have made the exact same statement 50 years ago. At that point, a little more than 80 per cent of global energy was provided by fossil fuels, and wood was the next largest energy source. All of this has not meaningfully changed. What has changed are our words and our money. Many years ago, we started to invest more money, mostly in wind, solar, batteries and transmission to connect these alternative energy sources to our grids. More than $10 trillion has been expended in this effort, and today it accounts for less than 3 per cent of global energy. All of it is in one slice of the energy stack, the electricity sector, and wherever large amounts have been invested, the result has been meaningfully higher prices. Therefore, I think that we always have to honour the math and the numbers. I suggest that we say “energy addition” instead of “energy transition” so that we can honour the math as well as our ambitions. I now resume my functions as President of the Council. There are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers.