( https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/07/pentagon-f-35-deliv... is related )

What does sound plausible is that some mil-spec actuator (let's say a pneumatic actuator or a motor) happens to have a magnet from China in it. That is not a big deal.

I find it hard to believe that a US mechanical engineer working on the F-35 part would spec an alloy that is only available from China as some fundamental part of the design. E.g. a wing, or body panels, etc. I don't have direct experience but from knowledge working in other manufacturing industries engineers tend to prefer locally available alloys as they're more familiar with their properties and they can easily get them for prototyping purposes Now if the entire wing of the F-35 is subcontracted to China then you'd expect Chinese alloys in that wing. Many products are subcontracted to China and so it's no surprise they'll have Chinese made magnets, alloys etc. But weapons systems are generally not. High end weapons systems like the F-35 may have some secret materials in them that are designed as part of that program and manufactures locally. I guess it's theoretically possible they use some raw materials from China but those being irreplaceable at any cost (when you're talking billion dollar systems and relatively low quantity) also doesn't pass the smell test.

What would settle this question is us getting a BOM of the F-35 with the specific parts/materials that are a concern. We're obviously not gonna get that. Alternatively some sort of reliable source, like head of engineering for one of these companies. I don't think we've seen this either.

The simplest explanation is that saying this impacts something like the F-35 sells more newspapers or advances some agenda. I'd buy the economic leverage argument; just not the national security one. Not without more evidence.

Think about much bigger chunks of semiconductor industry where TSMC represents 100% of world's capacity for certain most advanced production nodes.

Why hasn't this been done? We first knew China/rare earths was a security and strategic issue at least 15 years ago.

One has little sympathy for the US when it's been sitting idle on its hands doing SFA for all that time.

We are so deep in AI and super computing or wasteful server side computing that we forget that lower end chips are in absolutely everything. And China can produce those just fine.

Then you need this for all the various REEs for the final goods.

You don't just build a mine and off you go. The US gave up a lot of strategic supply chains a long time ago.

This was identified as a threat back in 2015. The DoD has been buying big stakes in non-Chinese mines, and ramping up the MP mine in Nevada.

Could it be disruptive if China chokes off supply? Sure. Is it an existential threat? No

Probably because that alternative was to build next gen programs to be less performant, and can't settle when platform last 30/40/50 years now.

The problem isn't lol US start making fancy magnets. The problem is lol modern US MIC hardware performance/overmatch is built around access to ABUNDANT fancy magnets that can only be built at scale/cost via processes PRC pioneered because they have (relatively unique) access to geologicly bound ionic clay deposits in PRC backyard. That capability doesn't exist in past history. US+co never had it. And if US can't replicate it, the entire current tranch of military hardware based on size, weight, (SWaP) of pushing highend PRC magnetics to their limits (motors of missiles, planes, precision motors, aesa radars, sonars), might not even make operational sense.

Then strategic delimma is budgetting 100s of billions into retrofitting/integrating of alternative components with slightly different (potentially inferior) performance characteristics. Or trillions in new programs based on alternative material assumptions. That's the real killer. Moving away from PRC HREE dependency =/= make more rocks, but if make more rocks no worky, or settle with making slightly different/less performant rocks, then have to redesign/reengineer/requalify the entire force structure over decades.

For strategic reasons the Military budgets enormous funds on items that may or may not pay off, it's a recognized gamble that all militaries engage in out of deemed necessity.

Why "potentially inferior performance", are you suggesting the US doesn't possess mining and chemistry expertise that are up to Chinese standards?

Just because the US hasn't needed to process REs to certain standards or requirements in the past doesn't mean it's not capable of doing so.

No, the opposite. Most militaries import equipment / are takers. Most militaries not engaged in very expensive R&D and capex to maintain overmatch. Most militaries buy off the shelf from vendors and make do because defense budget not priority unlike US.

US military budget while enormous is not unlimited, already experiencing extreme capitilization issues across the force, active naval hulls, airframes age etc are all in very bad state. 100's of billions buys a lot of hardware, but more importantly non trivial DELAYs a lot of hardware if there needs to be reengineeering.

>up to Chinese standards >it's not capable of doing so

A bunch of the HREE US _NEVER_ had industrial process knowledge for commercial mining. PRC accumulated 20+ years of R&D, build out workforce, infra, supply chains. Do I think US replicate part of that / hit PRC quality AND quantity in short time, i.e. before have to start substituting components if PRC locks down REE hard. Serious doubts, i.e. dysprosium, terbim for heat resistent magnets were lab tech and ONLY PRC has ever extracted at scale, and it's application is ONLY because PRC can extract them at scale. It's like saying PRC has lab EUV technology too, but doesn't mean they can do commercial scale, or even strategic scale unlike ASML who has decades of R&D and tacit knowledge. There's is zero reason to believe US is remotely capable of spinning up scale of HREE operation required in critical timeframe.

Now keep in mind PRC HREE is ONLY viable because they have specific geologic deposits that are economic to extract at scale. US does not have those deposits, US to break hard rocks (vs PRC leech from soft clay), it's magnitudes less output, if US needs to spend 100X more effort for same unit of HREE, it may not even be strategically sustainable, see how PRC has more shale than US but can't extract it economically, because it's very deep so doesn't even try and ended up pivoting to entirely different tech stack - renewables - despite US wanking about blockading PRC oil SLOCs for decades.

This is like when people say but US was industrial powerhouse in WW2, US can mobilize again. But the reality is US industrial capacity was 5/5 in WW2, but PRC has changed the denominator to 50. There is a lot of things US can't do now. Not that it can't do _eventually_ but can't do on timelines required. MIC overmatch is about doing things in strategic relelvant timeframe, i.e. we're talking about HREE that goes into sensors, aelectronic warfare actuators for highend aviation/missiles performance, the bread and butter of next gen platforms.

At some point, the time constraint may compel US it's strategically better off basically retooling to different componets with different material science - that's decades + trillions pivot. Presumably short term stopgaps would be less performant since US MIC R&D does make effort to use leading edge for overmatch, whatever alternative they switch to will be second best. But again the real killer is every part of this is time friction, measured in decades that disrupt the entire procurement cycle, split force design, it's not problem you can throw money at - which again even US DoD/W seemingly doesn't have... or else US wouldn't be going through capitalization squeeze in navy/airforce. This translates to US overmatch declining, regional force balance / deterence changing, expose US posture to decades of vunerability. It's ripple of technical turn strategic issues US doesn't have the TIME to figure out in short/medium term, and arguably money, at least without taking from elsewhere, which in DoD/W case is going to be procurement, because most other costs fixed.

That's BS. If the US considered the shortage important enough and really wanted to then it could do so in a flash.

If you doubt this just look at how the US turned its manufacturing around in WWII. The speed of the production ramp-up was truly amazing.

That's not a call for Communism, during WWII the US was essentially under a command economy and manufacturing companies made good profits—some fortunes. Furthermore, the US government was run by very bright people such as Vannevar Bush and Harry Hopkins (they must be rolling in their graves at today's shambles).

The US doesn't have to go to such lengths today but it could partially do so by mandating that certain critical/strategic industries be directed to produce strategic goods and materials.

The real issues are lack of political will and stupid ideological differences.