Live

The geopolitics of cobalt

It is hidden inside the batteries that power electric cars, charge our mobile phones, and store energy from renewable sources. Without it, the energy transition would remain on paper. Demand is skyrocketing, its value is soaring, and with it the geopolitical fever over who controls its extraction and, above all, its processing. Cobalt has emerged as one of the most essential minerals for powering the global economy, strengthening the role of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) as a “pillar” of the energy transition—because more than 70% of the world’s cobalt comes from its mines. Annual production exceeded 170,000 tons in 2023, but the monetary value of this raw material does not remain in Congo. Seventy-five percent of cobalt is processed in China, which controls not only refining but also the battery industry, creating a vicious cycle of geo-economic dependence for Europe.

The European Union, through the Global Gateway initiative, according to a report published in 2024, seeks to break free from Chinese energy influence by investing in local processing in Congo and in infrastructure such as the Lobito corridor, which aims to connect Katanga with the west coast of Africa. At the same time, the main objective is to build a cobalt refinery in the DRC, with costs falling by up to three times compared to outsourcing to the US or China, while reducing CO₂ emissions from the production chain by 30%.

The European green transition promises a cleaner, fairer future not just for the continent but for the planet—after all, in recent years, reality has surpassed the West’s dreams of what the world should be. The path to this new era seems to pass through well-known European paths, those of exploitation and silent complicity. The cobalt of the Congo, the cornerstone of “clean” technologies, is mined at the highest possible human cost. The cobalt is the cornerstone of “clean” technologies and its journey is shaped less by where it is extracted and more by where it is transformed.

Until now, though, Congo’s cobalt first goes through Beijing before finally reaching European batteries via six stations. Geopolitical control isn’t exercised at the mine, but at the factory.

A blooded green transition

Behind every electric vehicle and smartphone lies a world of dust, ecological pollution, and violence. In southeastern DR Congo, cobalt mining has had a serious impact on public health and the environment. Every day, children and women who work or live near mines are exposed to contaminated air, water, and soil. Research has documented cases of women with reproductive problems, such as irregular menstruation, genital infections, and congenital abnormalities in infants, related to toxic emissions from mines.

Soil toxicity is exacerbated by the use of hazardous chemicals and the uncontrolled operation of artisanal mines. For the Congo, fish is a staple food, but it is now contaminated with high concentrations of heavy metals. At the same time, the violent displacement of communities and the destruction of homes for the expansion of industrial mines are a daily reality: residents of Kolwezi saw their homes marked with red crosses before being razed to the ground, without community consultation or decent compensation.

The human cost 

The extraction of cobalt in the Congo not only strips the subsoil but also robs thousands of people of their dignity and the basic material infrastructure they have built up over the years. The violent displacement of families for the expansion of mines—as in the case of the Cité Gécamines area in Kolwezi—is accompanied by demolitions of homes and the destruction of community infrastructure. 

The violent displacement of families for the expansion of mines—as in the case of the Cité Gécamines area in Kolwezi—is accompanied by the demolition of homes, a lack of compensation, and military repression. Witnesses in the area describe beatings and even sexual assaults by members of the armed forces. Kabibi, a widow and mother, describes how she was raped by three soldiers while trying to save her crops shortly before they were bulldozed near the Metalkol mine. Such practices systematically violate the basic principles of international and humanitarian law, as noted in Amnesty International’s research. The concept of a just and green transition seems shallow if it does not include the people who are paying the price for the climate ambitions of the global North for a sustainable future.

The European Union risks remaining completely dependent on China if it does not immediately take steps to promote fair policies for the Congo in a sustainable and independent manner with regard to its supply of critical metals such as cobalt, in order to secure its energy autonomy. This is because the EU’s policy initiatives to date, such as the Global Gateway and strategic partnerships with the DRC and Zambia, remain largely theoretical. The idea of a cobalt refinery on Congolese soil, which would reduce emissions and bring more value to local communities, is hampered by political instability, corruption, and Chinese dominance in most mines.

Europe, while declaring its desire to “decouple” from China, continues to tacitly benefit from the same supply chains that perpetuate exploitation. As MEP Marie-Pierre Vedrenne points out, any agreements on the supply of cobalt must be accompanied by guarantees against child labor and inhumane mining conditions, something that is currently far from reality. At the same time, organizations such as Amnesty International accuse European companies of turning a blind eye to human rights violations, as long as the raw materials reach the factories of the Old Continent on time.

What future does the transition hold?

Europe’s inability to devise a strategy that incorporates both environmental commitments and social justice shows that the “green” transition may remain an unfulfilled promise. Power relations must be balanced, and geopolitical clout must give way to fair investment at the local level, which means that Europe should not continue to depend on Chinese refineries and Congolese mines, ignoring the shadows that weigh on its own energy future.

Europe and China—and, of course, America— and large green technology companies have a responsibility to address not only the climate crisis, but also the ethical crisis that accompanies it. Investments in local processing in the Congo, institutional support, protection of human rights, and supply chain regulations the energy transition risks being built on the same colonial foundations that led the South to its current position, with the reinforcement of local fiefdoms and corruption as a deep state that even the people of Congo cannot overturn with mere political will.

Europe is once again proving unprepared to deal with global turmoil with strategic empathy and autonomy. It found itself exposed in terms of energy when Russia turned off the gas taps; it falters every time Washington changes its tone or priorities; and now, faced with the green transition, it is surrendering itself to China’s commercial yoke. The old continent is in danger of finding itself “naked” instead of building alternatives, instead of investing in the creation of fair and local supply chains, instead of engaging in equal dialogue with the countries of the South. Europe is acting like an embryo, living off Beijing’s umbilical cord and waiting to be fed — whatever comes its way. 

What should be understood is that the energy transition is not simply a matter of technology or green investment; it is a political act with clear ethical and geostrategic implications. Part of the energy transition must be a policy that promotes decentralized solutions that enhance self-sufficiency, local participation, and social justice in ways such as off-grid technologies like energy communities and other options, offering an alternative model where every household and business can produce its own energy, independent of geopolitical blackmail and corporate monopolies. However, in order for this not to remain mere words, serious public investment and institutional will are required, not only for the stability of the network, but also for the construction of a new ethic in global cooperation.

There is no need to use chaos theory to understand where we are headed; the initial conditions have already been set and the deviations are multiplying; EU policy will be faced with the question of whether to remain trapped in a new colonialism with an ecological veneer or to accept that truly sustainable development cannot be based on the silence of the oppressed, and to move forward with the appropriate policies. If the transition is not for everyone, then it is neither green nor fair; it is the next phase of a familiar tactic, that of plundering local wealth.

Written by

Shape the conversation

Do you have anything to add to this story? Any ideas for interviews or angles we should explore? Let us know if you’d like to write a follow-up, a counterpoint, or share a similar story.

Write a counterargument article Write a related article