BANGKOK — A new memorandum of understanding on critical and rare earth minerals signed between Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul and U.S. President Donald Trump at the 47th ASEAN Summit in Malaysia has sparked debate in Thailand, with critics warning of geopolitical risks, environmental harm, and unequal terms favoring Washington.
U.S. Embassy Defends Deal
The U.S. Embassy in Bangkok on October 30 released a statement titled “Decoding the Critical Minerals MOU: Why U.S.-Thailand Cooperation on Critical Minerals Matters,” defending the agreement. It said the MOU is designed to strengthen supply chains and investment, not to impose legal obligations or infringe on national sovereignty.
According to the embassy, the pact will allow the two countries to share technical expertise, promote responsible mineral development, and enhance Thailand’s competitiveness in mineral processing. The statement added that the MOU builds on the U.S.-Thai alliance and expands trade, investment, and future commercial opportunities.
Opposition Lawmakers Demand Answers
Meanwhile, opposition lawmakers from the Pheu Thai Party and People’s Party filed an urgent motion to debate the agreement. Sarasnant Arnannopporn, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Prime Minister Anutin and the foreign minister must clarify the deal’s terms, calling it a “major issue with long-term impacts.”
Pheu Thai MP Jittipoj Viriyaroj criticized the government for signing the MOU without public or parliamentary consultation. He warned that the deal grants the U.S. preferential access to future mineral exploration and could strain ties with China, which dominates 70% of global rare earth mining and 90% of refining.
Phatthrapong Lilaphat, a People’s Party MP, said the government lacked understanding of rare earth issues, noting the MOU omits key environmental safeguards while allowing U.S. “analysis to expand areas and coordinates of mineral sources in Thailand.” He said such clauses could disadvantage Thailand and allow Washington greater control over minerals transiting through the country.
“We’ve stumbled badly,” Phatthrapong said. “Other countries negotiated better terms, but our government accepted disadvantageous ones from the start.”
Thailand’s Mineral Landscape
Thailand’s Department of Mineral Resources reports more than 40 mineral types nationwide, with rock salt making up about 60% of total deposits, concentrated in the northeast. Roughly 19% of the country’s land contains mineral resources, and ongoing surveys aim to identify additional critical mineral reserves.
Thailand became one of the world’s top rare earth producers in 2024, with output reaching nearly 13,000 metric tons — a 261% increase from 2023 and 13 times more than in 2018, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Despite this surge, the domestic rare earth industry remains largely opaque. Thailand continues to import most of its rare earth materials from China for use in magnetic components for electric vehicles and electronics.
Environmental Concerns
Environmental expert Sonthi Kotchawat of the Environmental Academics Association warned that rare earth mining carries serious ecological risks. He said extracting these elements, though vital for modern technology, requires vast amounts of energy, water, and chemicals, producing hazardous waste that may include radioactive thorium and uranium.
Sonthi cautioned that rare earth mining could contaminate soil and water, release toxic dust, destroy forests, and create long-term radioactive waste — echoing environmental problems seen in neighboring Myanmar.
Geopolitics Context
Dr. Supavud Saicheua, chairman of the National Economic and Social Development Council, said China controls 44 million tons of the world’s 90 million tons of rare earth reserves and processes about 90% of global output.
He noted that Trump’s recent Asia tour sought similar agreements with Japan, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Cambodia as Washington tries to counter China’s dominance in the sector.
“Rare earths underpin technologies from AI to electric vehicles, but they also consume massive energy and water,” Supavud said. “While this ‘technology of hope’ drives innovation, it risks deepening inequality and creating new environmental and labor challenges.
____________