EL PAÍS openly proposes the América Futura column for its daily and global informative contribution on sustainable development. If you want to support our journalism, subscribe Here.
The Amazon, the climatic heart of the planet, has become a key frontier of the new geopolitics of critical minerals: those the world needs to produce batteries, solar panels, turbines and even high-tech weapons. From niobium and tantalum to tin and rare earths, these minerals hold both the promise of a “green” energy transition and the expansion of military industries. But behind that clean future lies a reality: the foundations of tomorrow’s economy are being built with Amazonian resources obtained under conditions of violence, illegality and environmental devastation.
The investigation into Amazon Underworld has continued for almost a year The price of progress: the dark side of essential minerals for the Amazon have documented how armed groups, business networks and state officials control mineral extraction in areas of high biodiversity and indigenous territories in Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela. What we find is a system that mixes local economic precarity with global capital flows: entire communities subjected to forced labor, child recruitment, sexual violence and displacement, while international value chains remain opaque and unchecked.
The biggest imbalance is not just in terrain, but in knowledge. In much of the Amazon region, extraction takes place on the so-called “black sands”, mineral mixtures that contain niobium, tantalum, tin, titanium and rare earths. Identifying its composition requires sophisticated laboratory equipment, investments in geology and technical capabilities that are limited or non-existent in most Amazonian countries today.
As a result, many countries export raw materials without knowing precisely what minerals or elements they contain or what their real value is on the international market. Even local and informal communities, who extract and trade these materials, do not have the information or tools to negotiate fairly.
Meanwhile, China – which accounts for more than 90% of the world’s rare earth refining capacity – and other international buyers know exactly what they are buying. This knowledge gap reproduces an old colonial logic: consumer countries retain the power to define the price, destination and discourse of the energy transition, while the South provides the bodies, territories and risks.
The dispute over critical minerals is redefining international and environmental politics. In several regions, discourses on energy transition, economic development and national security are intertwined, generating tensions between sustainability, sovereignty and cooperation.
In South America, countries such as Brazil, Colombia and Peru face a dual challenge: protecting Amazon ecosystems and local communities, while responding to global economic pressures and growing demand for strategic minerals. This fragile balance is reflected in national debates on so-called “strategic” mining, which seeks to combine growth with socio-environmental responsibility, but is often used without due consultation or effective monitoring mechanisms.
In the United States, the debate on the energy transition is increasingly linked to national security and technological independence, while China consolidates its leadership in the refining and processing of rare earths, promoting bilateral agreements and investments in infrastructure in Latin America.
Although these global dynamics promise innovation and development, they also transfer the environmental and social costs of an economy dependent on scarce materials to the Global South. In this interconnected scenario, the Amazon becomes the most vulnerable link in a global chain of dependence: it provides the resources that support the energy transition, but disproportionately receives the impacts and human costs of this process.
In this context, the COP30 to be held in Belém represents a unique opportunity to strengthen international cooperation on essential minerals from the Amazon. More than a technical discussion, this is an ethical and political debate on how to ensure that the energy transition is fair, transparent and truly global.
It is essential to promote traceability, due diligence and socio-environmental remediation mechanisms, while recognizing local capacities and the role of communities as allies in protecting territories. No transition will be sustainable if it repeats the patterns of inequality that have marked the history of extractivism that regenerates devastating impacts on fragile ecosystems such as the Amazon.
The Amazon is neither a mine nor a metaphor. It is a living region, inhabited by people who for centuries have cared for the land that the world is trying to save. Listening to them and strengthening their participation is the true measure of progress.
