As competition over critical minerals intensifies between China and the US, the Chinese regime is increasing investments in critical minerals and restricting influence from other global investors. Foreign malign influencers are also increasingly promoting narratives from a wide variety of sources, framing world events as beneficial to China while the West struggles with effective policy making. When FMI promote anti-West narratives undetected, audience and country allegiances begin to shift away from the US and our allies, resulting in lost investment opportunities and additional costs in US AI supply chains.
China’s latest export restrictions on critical minerals mark a significant escalation in the ongoing US-China trade conflict. In response to new tariffs imposed by President Trump and prior semiconductor restrictions under Biden, Beijing is leveraging its dominance in key supply chains to retaliate. For example, in 2023 China's gallium exports dropped over 50% from 2022, with refined gallium exports ceasing entirely in August and September.[1] With additional sanctions on U.S. defense firms and potential crackdowns on other critical resources, China’s evolving legal and economic tactics signal a more aggressive approach to economic warfare.[2]
According to AidData, 92% of mineral financing from China is for extraction (rather than mid-stream processing) while 83% of Beijing’s official lending for rare earth elements (REEs) goes to mining operations that are partially or wholly owned by Chinese companies. As a result, China is deeply incentivized to maintain favorable coverage of Chinese mineral investments as a direct reflection on the CCP.
EdgeTheory Narrative Intelligence has identified an increase in malign influence activities to promote China’s international reputation while denigrating the West’s. Narratives frame the US as struggling to compete in global rare earth element acquisitions and position China as a peaceful country with stable industry opportunities.
In the past 30 days, 136 Foreign Malign Influencers (FMI) have amplified 555 narrative items on the global competition for rare earth elements (REEs). These narratives portray China as dominant in mineral processing, dismiss US interest in Ukrainian minerals as a lost cause, and depict the West as ineffective in managing resource-driven geopolitical maneuvers.
Overall, narratives underscore the strategic importance of these materials in high-tech industries. Intelligence analysts, business executives, and political decision makers must closely monitor developing narratives to maintain a strategic decision advantage in today’s complex information landscape.
As indicated by the proprietary mapping above, FMI coverage originates from several regional hubs but focuses on only two primary targets, the US (Washington DC) and Ukraine (Kyiv). These focus areas emerged following the Trump Administration’s proposal to offer military aid to Ukraine in exchange for rights to critical minerals, including REEs.
The majority of narratives targeting DC originate from Moscow and promote stories opposing Trump’s plan to provide military aid to Ukraine in exchange for critical minerals, leveraging language that denigrates Zelensky.
Russia-aligned social media have seized on this narrative to develop conspiracy theories that frame western powers as deeply corrupt and aggressive.
Translation [emphasis added]: Zelensky is in huge trouble! According to leaked information, in mid-January, he transferred a large portion of Ukraine’s mineral wealth to London in a secret addendum to a 100-year security agreement with the United Kingdom! Meanwhile, Trump’s national security adviser urged Zelensky to sign the mineral deal with the U.S. without delay! But Zelensky can’t—has he already signed it over to London? And Trump has already made a move at the G7, declaring that Russia is no longer an aggressor!
Aeronet News has over 10,000 subscribers on Telegram and nearly 4,000 on X (formerly Twitter).
Aeronet elaborates on the claim in its online platform, claiming any agreement with the United States for Ukrainian critical minerals would violate international law.
The above article portrays the legal landscape as a done deal, framing US actions as obviously illegal and discounting opportunities for diplomacy and policy changes.
This strategy reflects the Kremlin’s attempt to characterize US-Ukraine relations as led by inept leaders with no knowledge or concern for the rule of law, thereby decreasing citizens’ confidence in western governments through purportedly “matter of fact” reporting on legal issues.
Similarly, FMI narratives aimed directly at Ukraine attempt to create friction between Kyiv and Washington DC. These narratives portray the U.S. as both opportunistic as it takes advantage of Ukraine’s circumstances and inept in its execution of policy proposals.
The above article from RT states that Zelensky “politely declined” to sign an agreement with the US to cede mineral rights and is seeking a “better deal,” framing Ukraine as single handedly resisting US predations.
Notably, Russian sources are willing to frame Ukraine as a victim in some respects so long as it serves the Kremlin’s agenda of dividing the west to further weaken its opposition. In this way, Russia simultaneously frames Ukraine as a vulnerable victim and a vanguard for resisting the US’s intentions for Eastern Europe. The former narrative promotes sentiment for a new government over Ukraine (viz., Russia) to restore proper authority and implement effective industry, while the latter narrative drives a wedge between western audiences supporting Ukrainian independence and those supporting greater US intervention, creating a false dichotomy where conditional support for Ukraine purportedly harms its self-determination.
Because Russia-aligned sources occasionally frame Ukraine as a victim and a vanguard, these FMI appear less biased and are thus more likely to be accepted by Western audiences as credible. Narrative Intelligence (NARINT) helps audiences see through complex narratives to the motivations driving them.
With EdgeTheory NARINT capabilities, analysts can identify where multiple FMI coordinate these narratives. Regarding Ukrainian minerals, FMI sources in Iran, Sri Lanka, and India parrot similar narratives.
EdgeTheory surfaces these indications of coordination that accelerates FMI’s reach without needing to engage social media platforms where specific actors and their level of audience influence could be identified.
While FMI narratives originate from a wide variety of countries, European and US sources demonstrate a more narrow narrative focus.
European sources publishing on critical minerals focus almost exclusively on Ukraine. Notice the wide disparity of source distribution between European and FMI voices:
While FMI sources coordinate widespread information operations targeted at a few key events, European sources discuss worldwide issues but only a few sources promote the majority of articles, resulting in less audience and global reach compared to FMI.
Almost all European sources targeting regions other than the US or Ukraine originate from one of the following cities: Valletta, Malta; Brussels, Belgium; or London, UK. These narratives tend to miss Russia’s spin on Ukraine’s refusal to sign a mineral sharing agreement with the US and instead promote a Europe-centric perspective that focuses on the EU’s collective actions.
These sources have significant reach. Oil Price accounts for 6% of all articles published from European sources on critical minerals.
The Times of Malta, EU Reporter, and Oil Price focus on European actions in light of US policies and statements rather than Russian aggression and potential Ukrainian policy developments. European audiences are consequently fed narratives that, even if accurate, miss the full picture.
Narrative Intelligence alleviates these blind spots, enabling audiences, analysts, and policymakers alike to see through narratives to a holistic picture of world events.
US sources have an even narrower focus. US sources reporting on critical minerals are balanced across left-right biases, creating the illusion that US audiences are getting the full story. In reality, U.S. sources overlook critical aspects of the conflict, including the growing attention from foreign malign influencers on various European locations—not just Ukraine, which remains the primary focus of the West.
Breaking out of one’s own bias or echo chamber is not sufficient to fully understand complex and dynamic conflicts. Intelligence analysts, businesses, and policymakers must go further—understanding not just their own perspectives but also the regions that adversaries and competitors are focusing on. A truly comprehensive view requires analyzing where and how foreign malign influencers are shaping narratives across multiple regions, not just those prioritized by the West.
EdgeTheory Narrative Intelligence reveals how FMI outpace Western sources, amplifying broad, unchallenged narratives while U.S. and European coverage remains narrow.
For example, themes across FMI tend to focus on US diplomatic moves, amplifying these narratives to their diverse audiences:
By comparison, top themes from US sources include discussions of various geopolitical concerns but have much more limited domestic audience reach and focus on implications for the Ukraine conflict and not impacts to various surrounding nations. Themes include:
As US sources discuss domestic issues in light of international competition, US audiences miss developments in foreign perceptions of Ukraine, such as the various views listed above on Trump’s broad policy proposals.
EdgeTheory’s breakdown of the themes reveals FMI promote wedge issues to sow divisions among Ukraine’s supporters.
EdgeTheory Narrative Intelligence briefs reveal how known foreign malign influencers monitor and engage with other FMI entities to synchronize their narratives. This coordination helps them amplify messaging, reinforce disinformation, and shape public perception across multiple regions. This strategy also enables FMI to accelerate their narratives without going through proxies or traceable social media accounts and bot amplifications.
As indicated by the above graphic, sources such as Firstpost tend to initiate narratives which are then parrotted and amplified by other sources including Times Now, SCMP, and ZeroHedge.
This regional and audience diversity gives FMI a volume advantage over US and European sources which publish independently of each other.
Widespread pro-China sentiment being initiated outside of China’s borders indicates significant Chinese alignment amongst foreign influencers without the influence of official state-media. The narrative mapping of FMI sources below confirms this network operates largely outside of China while maintaining a pro-China focus.
The ability to track these narratives over time becomes critical when considering issues like certain nations’ willingness to support (or at least not oppose) a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. China’s well-established strategy of pressuring developing countries to support reunification with Taiwan by withholding aid implies China’s concern that when it attempts to retake Taiwan it will meet with stiff and widespread international opposition.[3] EdgeTheory enables analysts to track whether sources in these countries align with China or act as dissidents, opposing Chinese information priorities. This capability enables analysts to determine potential inroads for diplomacy, equips businessmen to make strategic decisions regarding the time and place of investments or potential business partners, and gives decision makers an advantage in identifying potentially shifting political alignments.
EdgeTheory's briefs also reveal how different foreign malign influence actors prioritize certain issues over others, shedding light on the key concerns of various countries.
For example, while a wide range of sources amplify FMI narratives, Russia-aligned sources consistently produce the highest volume of articles across all major themes, indicating their dominance and concern in shaping these discussions.
The top themes across all FMI are dominated by Russia-aligned articles, with China only leading the count on issues regarding electrical infrastructure.
Narrative intelligence theme analysis reveals how FMI sources coordinate to support central narratives. In this case, Russian and Chinese sources publish a similar number of articles, but regarding the majority of issues, Chinese sources support the Russian perspective.
Other issues such as Taiwan tend to see the opposite phenomena, where Russian sources publish a similar number of articles but willingly promote pro-China narratives. See EdgeTheory’s intel brief on Taiwan for more.
With EdgeTheory Narrative Intelligence, analysts and general audiences alike can see through the thousands of stories being pushed by FMI every day, and discover the underlying concerns of various malicious actors, their regions of interest, and most vulnerable audiences to information warfare.
With the rise of deepfake technology used to promote disinformation (such as the recent use of an AI Elon Musk to push Chinese propaganda),[4] EdgeTheory enables analysts to track amplifiers, trace images to identify who is pushing false narratives, and view the overall motivations behind such attacks.
EdgeTheory’s Narrative Intelligence briefs can help reveal what narratives are being pushed in various regions and how audiences, companies, and government officials can strategically respond to counter false narratives.
With EdgeTheory, intelligence analysts can monitor the alignment of country-specific sources, identify and assess popular positions on new or ongoing armed conflicts, and determine the risk of conflict between audiences on any given topic. Utilizing multilingual narrative analysis provides analysts with a strategic edge in identifying risk vectors for targeted audiences, evaluating the likelihood of consumer support or opposition to development projects, and crafting aligned messaging to strengthen investor and public relations.
Request a Personalized Demo Today to see how EdgeTheory’s technology can help you stay ahead of emerging narratives and risks.
