Earth

A special operations team is pinned down in a valley deep inside contested territory. Ammo is running low, and close air support is nonexistent. Extraction forces are still hours out. The operatives have kept the enemy at bay, but their ability to do so is dwindling with every round they fire. Their stocks of 40mm grenades have long been exhausted; now their rifles will soon run dry too. The sky cracks with a sonic boom, which echoes across the valley, and fighting pauses for a split second as fighters on both sides look up. Soon after, the shooting resumes, but out of the blinding sun comes a capsule stuffed with ammunition hanging on a parachute and flying right toward the special operations team.

Help has arrived… From orbit.

The above is a scene that sounds like it’s ripped right out of a Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare video game, but one company is working to make it a reality.

California-based space startup Inversion has unveiled its design for a fully reusable, lifting-body spacecraft named Arc. The spacecraft is intended to deliver critical cargo from space to any point on Earth within an hour, landing on water, snow or soil with a precision of around 50 feet, the company says. The concept, aimed squarely at the defense sector, reflects longstanding U.S. military interest in using space-based systems to rapidly move cargo around the globe to meet commanders’ urgent needs.

The mission concept involves the Arc spacecraft being launched into low Earth orbit atop a rocket. Arc then remains in orbit until its cargo is required to be delivered. At that point, the spacecraft uses a deorbit engine to re-enter the atmosphere, moving at very high speed. Arc uses small thrusters and large trailing-edge maneuvering flaps to adjust its position and speed during its fiery reentry, through the atmosphere, until it approaches the ‘drop zone.’

Once it has reached a lower altitude, Arc slows down and lands using its actively controlled parachute system. This is also able to fine-tune the spacecraft’s path back to Earth. The parachute ensures a soft landing, meaning that Arc can then be reused. The entire mission is uncrewed, with the Arc being commanded by autonomous control systems.

Interestingly, Inversion’s plan to field a spacecraft that’s able to put a cargo at any place on Earth within an hour has parallels with an ambition laid out by U.S. Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), back in 2020. TRANSCOM provides transportation services and solutions to all branches of the armed forces, as well as various other defense and governmental organizations.

Speaking back then, U.S. Army Gen. Stephen R. Lyons, TRANSCOM’s commander, said: “Think about moving the equivalent of a C-17 payload anywhere on the globe in less than an hour. Think about that speed associated with the movement of transportation of cargo… There is a lot of potential here…”

At that point, TRANSCOM had begun a partnership with both SpaceX and Exploration Architecture Corporation (XArc) to pursue space-based rapid delivery concepts. SpaceX has since been working with the Air Force and Space Force on the ‘Rocket Cargo’ program, which seeks to quickly deliver cargo anywhere on Earth that can support a vertical landing.

It should be noted, however, that the sizes of payloads that Arc will be able to deliver are much smaller than those outlined by Lyons. The spacecraft itself will measure only around eight feet by four feet.

The C-17 has a maximum payload of around 82 tons, although normal payloads are around 60 tons or less. Arc is reportedly planned to have a cargo of just 500 pounds. Still, small cargoes often require very big logistics. As we have noted in a prior piece:

“Even the Navy has said in the past that when ships encounter problems as a result of logistics-related issues that leave them partially mission capable or non-mission capable, 90 percent of the time this can be resolved by the delivery of a component weighing 50 pounds or less.“

Nevertheless, Inversion clearly sees a niche for the very high-speed delivery of what it describes as “mission-enabling cargo.”

Inversion doesn’t provide any specific examples of the kinds of cargoes that might be delivered by Arc, beyond “equipment, food, or other mission cargo.” Conceivably, key cargo could comprise time-sensitive equipment and ammunition needed at forward operating locations. Since these spacecraft would be pre-launched, they would likely be filled with a range of generic cargoes that are generally time-sensitive. Then, they would be deorbited on demand.

Today, other small autonomous resupply systems have been used in combat, like the paragliding Snow Goose, and others are in development or limited use now. But these systems fly exclusively within the atmosphere and are much slower, more vulnerable, and require regional basing or an aerial delivery platform to launch them from relatively nearby.

Bearing in mind the considerable cost of a space launch, these cargoes would presumably only be delivered in the most critical scenarios, the kinds where only a high-cost rapid transport would suffice.

Such a capability would appear to have particular relevance in the context of future contingencies in the Indo-Pacific theater. With a growing expectation that this region will see a future high-end conflict involving the U.S. military, the ability to call upon space-based systems, like Arc, to quickly bring critical supplies to the area could be of high value — provided, once again, that the technology can be mastered.

Since Arc is reusable, that would go some way to making it more cost-efficient, when the vehicle can be recovered. Inversion also proposes putting several Arc vehicles into orbit at the same time (it’s unclear if these would be transported by the same or different rockets). The result has been described as something like a series of “constellations” with a variety of contingency cargoes that could be tailored to different customers and operational theaters.

Each Arc vehicle is reportedly able to remain in orbit for up to five years.

Another advantage compared to other space-based cargo-delivery concepts is the fact that Arc uses a parachute landing system.

Arc can, in theory, deliver cargo to any place on the planet, including remote regions, disaster zones, or hard-to-access theaters of war. Other orbital delivery concepts, such as suborbital VTOL rockets, have needed at least some kind of infrastructure to support the cargo-recovery part of the mission, but Arc should do away with that requirement, at least for small cargoes.

Last month, Inversion conducted precision drop-testing to prove the actively controlled parachute system that ensures that Arc will be able to put its cargoes where they are needed.

The company now says it wants to conduct a first mission with Arc as early as next year, which seems highly ambitious.

On the other hand, the startup does have some valuable experience from its Ray spacecraft, Inversion’s first, which was launched in January of this year as part of SpaceX’s Transporter-12 mission. This test mission helped prove technologies, including solar panels, propulsion, and separation systems, which will be incorporated into Arc.

For the time being, Inversion is focused solely on Arc’s military potential, although there would clearly be specific commercial applications as well. There is also the question of the possibility of adapting Arc as a reusable and recoverable satellite or even orbital supply vehicle. Meanwhile, the company has spoken confidently of producing hundreds of examples of the spacecraft every year.

Before that happens, and presuming military customers are forthcoming, Inversion will need to prove that its concept of space-based cargo deliveries can be cost-effective. There will also be various other regulatory issues to overcome, bearing in mind that this is an altogether new kind of transportation system.

Despite multiple dead ends and abortive programs, the idea of using some kind of space-based solution for rapid transport across the globe is one that won’t go away. Potentially, with its much smaller cargo loads, reusable spacecraft, and parachute-landing system, Inversion’s de-orbit on-demand cargo concept could be the one that finally breaks the mold.

Contact the author: [email protected]

WASHINGTON — President Trump will host leaders of five Central Asian countries at the White House on Thursday as he intensifies his hunt for rare earth metals needed for high-tech devices, including smartphones, electric vehicles and fighter jets.

Trump and the officials from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan are holding an evening summit and dinner on the heels of Trump managing at least a temporary thaw with Chinese leader Xi Jinping on differences between the United States and China over the export of rare earth elements, a key point of friction in their trade negotiations.

Early last month, Beijing expanded export restrictions over vital rare earth elements and magnets before announcing, after Trump-Xi talks in South Korea last week, that China would delay its new restrictions by one year.

Washington is now looking for new ways to circumvent China on critical minerals. China accounts for nearly 70% of the world’s rare earth mining and controls roughly 90% of global rare earths processing.

Central Asia holds deep reserves of rare earth minerals and produces roughly half the world’s uranium, which is critical to nuclear power production. But the region badly needs investment to further develop the resources.

Central Asia’s critical mineral exports have long tilted toward China and Russia. Kazakhstan, for example, in 2023 sent $3.07 billion in critical minerals to China and $1.8 billion to Russia compared with $544 million to the U.S., according to country-level trade data compiled by the Observatory of Economic Complexity, an online data platform.

A bipartisan group of senators introduced legislation Wednesday to repeal Soviet-era trade restrictions that some lawmakers say are holding back American investment in the Central Asian nations, which became independent with the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union.

“Today, it’s not too late to deepen our cooperation and ensure that these countries can decide their own destinies, as a volatile Russia and an increasingly aggressive China pursue their own national interests around the globe at the cost to their neighbors,” said Republican Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a sponsor of the legislation. “The United States offers Central Asian nations the real opportunity to work with a willing partner, while lifting up each others’ economies.”

The grouping of countries, referred to as the “C5+1,” has largely focused on regional security, particularly in light of the two-decade U.S. military presence and then withdrawal from neighboring Afghanistan, China’s treatment of ethnic Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang and attempts by Russia to reassert power in the region.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio welcomed the Central Asian leaders at the State Department on Wednesday to mark the 10-year anniversary of the C5+1 and to plug the potential for expanding the countries economic ties to the U.S.

“We oftentimes spend so much time focused on crisis and problems – and they deserve attention – that sometimes we don’t spend enough time focused on exciting new opportunities,” Rubio said. “And that’s what exists here now: an exciting new opportunity in which the national interests of our respective countries are aligned.”

Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau and the U.S. ambassador to India, Sergio Gor, who also serves as President Donald Trump’s special envoy to South and Central Asia, recently visited Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to prepare for the summit.

Administration officials say deepening the U.S. relationship with the countries is a priority, a point they have made clear to the Central Asian officials.

The president’s “commitment to this region is that you have a direct line to the White House, and that you will get the attention that this area very much deserves,” Gor told the Central Asian officials Wednesday.

In 2023, Democratic President Joe Biden met with the five leaders on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly. That was the only other time that a sitting president has taken part in a C5+1 summit.

Madhani writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Matthew Lee contributed to this report.

Kim, you’re not doing amazing, sweetie.

Kim Kardashian, long at the center of a few conspiracy theories herself, has cosigned one that’s a fan favorite — and also thoroughly debunked.

During the most recent episode of Hulu’s “The Kardashians,” the fashion and beauty mogul professed her belief that the 1969 moon landing, a watershed moment of great American pride, never really happened. She also tried to get her “All’s Fair” co-star Sarah Paulson to drink the Kool-Aid.

“I’m sending you, like, so far a million interviews with both Buzz Aldrin and the other one [Neil Armstrong],” Kardashian told Paulson on the show.

“Yes, do it,” Paulson told the Skims founder, promising to go on her own “massive deep dive.”

Kardashian then went on to cite an interview that’s made the rounds on TikTok wherein she alleged that Buzz Aldrin — who completed the Apollo 11 mission alongside Armstrong and capsule communicator Michael Collins — gave the hoax away. (The going theory, of course, is that famous footage of the mission was actually filmed on a sound stage.)

“So I think it didn’t happen,” Kardashian concluded, adding that Aldrin, 95, has “gotten old and now he, like, slurs.”

Hours after the episode dropped, NASA Acting Administrator Sean Duffy fact-checked the socialite.

“Yes, @KimKardashian, we’ve been to the Moon before… 6 times!” Duffy wrote Thursday on X. “And even better: @NASAArtemis is going back under the leadership of @POTUS.”

“We won the last space race and we will win this one too,” Duffy wrote.

As for Aldrin’s takes on the matter, a 2022 Reuters article debunked one of the most popular clips used to implicate the former astronaut, which was was taken out of very critical context.

In a shortened version of the clip, Conan O’Brien recounts to Aldrin a childhood memory of his family watching the astronauts walk on the moon.

“No, you didn’t,” Aldrin responds, seemingly contradicting O’Brien’s account. Later in the interview, however, Aldrin clarified that the moon landing itself was authentic, but the animated footage broadcast by TV stations at the time was not.

The National Air and Space Museum has explained that there was a $2.3-million camera on board to capture the real-life images that were sent back to Earth.

Nonetheless, Kardashian doubled down on her opinion when a producer on “The Kardashians” probed further.

“For the record, you think that we didn’t walk on the moon?” the producer asked.

“I don’t think we did. I think it was fake,” Kardashian said, adding that she’s seen several videos of Aldrin allegedly disputing the event.

“Why does Buzz Aldrin say it didn’t happen?” she said. “There’s no gravity on the moon. Why is the flag blowing? The shoes that they have in the museum that they wore on the moon is a different print in the photos. Why are there no stars?”

For what it’s worth, there is gravity on the moon, albeit about a sixth of what it is on Earth, give or take. Hence the footage of astronauts bouncing across the lunar surface but not flying off into space. As far as there being no breeze, NASA planned for the lack of one — a rod can be seen holding up the top of flag, because scientists knew the stars and stripes wouldn’t fly without one. And did we mention that Aldrin did not say it didn’t happen? Yes, we did. We did mention that.

To her credit, Kardashian was self-aware enough to add that people were “gonna say I’m crazy no matter what.”

She also encouraged viewers to look for themselves on Tiktok. Keep in mind, though, the accounts that regularly promote the moon-landing conspiracy theory are also fond of other mistaken notions, like saying the Earth is flat and aliens built the pyramids.

Since coming back to the White House earlier this year, President Donald Trump has made rare earth minerals one of his top priorities.

He’s focused on securing enough supply for the United States economy.

In March, Trump went as far as signing an executive order, where he invoked wartime powers to increase the production of rare earths.

And this week, he signed several agreements with a number of Asian countries, in the hopes of gaining access to the minerals.

This is all to counter China’s global dominance in this sector and Beijing’s recent restrictions on rare earth exports.

So, why are these minerals so crucial for the US economy? And can Trump break China’s monopoly?

Presenter: Bernard Smith

Guests:

Brian Wong – Assistant Professor in Philosophy at the University of Hong Kong.

Gracelin Baskaran – Mining Economist and Director of the Critical Minerals Security program at Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Huiyao Wang – President and Founder of Center for China and Globalization.

Global tensions are escalating over rare earth minerals after China applied severe export controls on critical minerals required to manufacture almost everything – from cars to weapons. The move has also sparked concerns about the global supply chain.

Strategic meetings will be held between European Union officials and Chinese representatives, starting with a videoconference Monday, to be followed by a meeting in Brussels the following day.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump will meet his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping on Thursday in South Korea, with financial markets attentive to whether the world’s two largest economic powers can bury the hatchet in their trade war.

At the heart of the dispute is China’s 9 October decision to restrict exports of rare earth elements. While these controls were initially a response to US tariffs, the EU has become collateral damage in the dispute and is considering ways to respond.

Why is China restricting rare earth exports?

Tensions first emerged between the US and China after Donald Trump returned to the White House and carried through an aggressive tariff policy – which the administration argues is needed to narrow a growing trade deficit – on allies and rivals alike.

On 2 April 2025 — coinciding with what Trump defined as US’ “Liberation Day” — Washington announced a 34% tariff on Chinese goods imported into the country, which, added to the existing 20%, brought total duties to 54%.

The trade war escalated after China responded with counter-tariffs, which surpassed the 100% threshold, making trade between the two practically impossible. Beyond the tariffs, to hit back, China looked to weaponise its monopoly over rare earth elements, imposing additional export restrictions on 4 April that have since remained in place.

Rare earths are a group of 17 elements used across the defence, electric vehicle, energy and electronics industries.

The world, including the EU, is heavily dependent on China, as the country controls 60% of global production and 90% of their refining, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

After a short truce, the dispute flared up again in September, and on 9 October 2025, China decided to extend its control over rare earth elements from seven to 12. The announcement was seen as China building leverage over the United States. The meeting between the two sides this week is crucial in dictating the path forward.

Meanwhile, the EU is caught between the two. While these restrictions aimed mostly at the US, it has also impacted the European industry. The controls take the form of licenses that are difficult to obtain, with European companies bearing the brunt, as European Commisisioner for Trade Maroš Šefčovič has repeatedly pointed out.

How is the EU responding?

In a speech over the weekend, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, said the Union is prepared to use all the tools at its disposal to combat what some European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, have described as economic coercion from China.

The remarks from the Commission president alluded to what is known as the anti-coercion instrument – designed with China in mind but never used.

The ACI, adopted in 2023, would allow the EU hit back at a third country by imposing tariffs or even restricting access to public procurement, licenses, or intellectual property rights.

“In the short term, we are focusing on finding solutions with our Chinese counterparts,” Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said on Saturday, warning, however, “But we are ready to use all of the instruments in our toolbox to respond if needed.”

European Council President António Costa met on Monday with Chinese Premier Li Qiang on the sidelines of the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur.

“I shared my strong concern about China’s expanding export controls on critical raw materials and related goods and technologies,” Costa said after the meeting, adding: “I urged him to restore as soon as possible fluid, reliable and predictable supply chains.”

Yet, tensions persist.

A planned meeting between Šefčovič and his Chinese counterpart Wang Wentao was cancelled and replaced by high-level talks between Chinese and European experts, a Commission spokesperson has confirmed. A video conference took place on Monday, and Chinese officials are set to arrive in Brussels for a meeting on Thursday.

While Brussels insists it wants to achieve a constructive solution without escalating, the Commission is pursuing a “de-risking” strategy to reduce its dependence on Chinese minerals. In addition, Germany and France have also suggested they would support stronger trade measures if a comprehensive solution cannot be found.

On Saturday, Von der Leyen announced a new plan – RESourceEU – exploring joint purchasing and stockpiling of rare earth, as well as “strategic” projects for the production and processing of critical raw materials here in Europe.

The EU also hopes to diversify its suppliers worldwide.

“We will speed up work on critical raw materials partnerships with countries like Ukraine and Australia, Canada, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Chile or Greenland,” von der Leyen said.

Oct. 20 (UPI) — Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday signed a “framework” of an $8.5 billion deal for projects involving critical minerals and rare earth elements during a meeting at the White House.

The two leaders, along with their aides, met for lunch in the Cabinet Room, where they also discussed military and other trade issuses.

Because of restrictions on Chinese exportrs to the United States, this gives an opportunity for Australia, which has the fourth-largest reserves of the minerals and elements. They are found in Western Australia, the Northern Territory and South Australia.

Rare earth minerals are a group of 17 elements crucial for electronics, including for the defense industry. Though they are called rare, many aren’t scare, including cerium, used for automotive catalytic converters and petroleum refining, which is more common than copper.

US President Donald Trump said the deal had been negotiated over the last four to five months.

United States President Donald Trump and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese have signed an agreement on rare earth and critical minerals as China tightens control over global supply.

The two leaders signed the deal on Monday at the White House.

Trump said the agreement had been negotiated over four or five months. The two leaders will also discuss trade, submarines and military equipment, Trump said.

Albanese described it as an $8.5bn pipeline “that we have ready to go”.

The full terms of the agreement were not immediately available. The two leaders said part of the agreement had to do with processing of the minerals. Albanese said both countries will contribute $1bn over the next six months for joint projects.

China has the world’s largest rare earths reserves, according to the US Geological Survey data, but Australia also has significant reserves.

The two leaders also planned to discuss the $239.4bn agreement, reached in 2023 under then-US President Joe Biden, in which Australia is to buy US nuclear-powered submarines in 2032 before building a new submarine class with Britain.

US Navy Secretary John Phelan told the meeting the US and Australia were working very closely to improve the original framework for all three parties “and clarify some of the ambiguity that was in the prior agreement”.

Trump said these were “just minor details”.

“There shouldn’t be any more clarifications, because we’re just, we’re just going now full steam ahead, building,” Trump said.

Australian officials have said they are confident it will proceed, with Defence Minister Richard Marles last week saying he knew when the review would conclude.

China’s rare earth export controls

Ahead of Monday’s meeting between the two leaders, Australian officials have emphasised Canberra is paying its way under AUKUS — a trilateral military partnership between the US, Australia and the United Kingdom, contributing $2bn this year to boost production rates at US submarine shipyards, and preparing to maintain US Virginia-class submarines at its Indian Ocean naval base from 2027.

The delay of 10 months in an official meeting since Trump took office has caused some anxiety in Australia as the Pentagon urged Canberra to lift defence spending. The two leaders met briefly on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York last month.

Australia is willing to sell shares in its planned strategic reserve of critical minerals to allies including Britain, as Western governments scramble to end their reliance on China for rare earths and minor metals.

Top US officials last week condemned Beijing’s expansion of rare earth export controls as a threat to global supply chains. China is the world’s biggest producer of the materials, which are vital for products ranging from electric vehicles to aircraft engines and military radars.

Resource-rich Australia, wanting to extract and process rare earths, put preferential access to its strategic reserve on the table in US trade negotiations in April.

Beijing says it will not back down in the face of threats, urging the US to resolve differences through negotiations.

China has called United States President Donald Trump’s new tariffs on Chinese goods hypocritical as it defended its curbs on exports of rare earth elements and equipment, while stopping short of imposing additional duties on US imports.

In a lengthy statement on Sunday, China’s Ministry of Commerce said its export controls on rare earths, which Trump had labelled “surprising” and “very hostile”, were introduced in response to a series of US measures since their trade talks held in Madrid, Spain, last month.

“China’s stance is consistent,” the ministry said in a statement posted online. “We do not want a tariff war but we are not afraid of one.”

Trump on Friday retaliated to the Chinese curbs on rare earth exports by announcing a 100 percent tariff on Chinese exports to the US and new export controls on critical software, effective from November 1.

Beijing cited Washington’s decision to blacklist Chinese firms and impose port fees on China-linked ships as examples of what it called “provocative and damaging” actions, calling Trump’s tariff threat a “typical example of double standards”.

“These actions have severely harmed China’s interests and undermined the atmosphere for bilateral economic and trade talks. China firmly opposes them,” the ministry said.

Unlike earlier rounds of tit-for-tat tariffs, China has not yet announced any countermeasures.

Rare earths have been a major sticking point in recent trade negotiations between the two superpowers. They are critical to manufacturing everything from smartphones and electric vehicles to military hardware and renewable energy technology.

China dominates the global production and processing of these materials. On Thursday, it announced new controls on the export of technologies used for the mining and processing of critical minerals.

The renewed trade tensions between the world’s two largest economies also risk derailing a potential summit between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea later this month. It would have been their first face-to-face encounter since Trump returned to power in January.

The dispute has also rattled global markets, dragging down major tech stocks and worrying companies reliant on China’s dominance in rare earth processing.

ADVERTISEMENT

Rare earth stocks climbed in the US after Beijing tightened its control over these critical materials, used in the vast majority of electronic devices, from smartphones and cars to ballistic missiles.

Across the Atlantic, European markets opened in a mixed mood while the Middle East peace deal progresses, brokered by US President Donald Trump.

With investors also watching political uncertainty in France, the pan-European STOXX 600 was up around 0.1% at 11.45 CEST, and Paris’ CAC 40 also gained 0.1%.

Frankfurt’s DAX and London’s FTSE 100 both slipped 0.1%, after an earlier rise for the DAX.

“The FTSE 100 was stuck in the mud as the rest of Europe ploughed ahead at the end of the trading week,” said Russ Mould, investment director at AJ Bell.

“Strength in consumer stocks and utilities was offset by weakness in miners and healthcare,” he said — adding: “it was also notable that defence stocks were being sold down, including Babcock, which has rocketed this year.”

In other news, oil prices were down on Friday morning. The US benchmark crude cost around 0.4% less than at the previous close, and traded at $61.26 per barrel at around 11.45 CEST. The international benchmark Brent lost 0.49% and cost $64.90 per barrel at the same time.

Gold prices also rose after hitting new records recently, trading at $4,018.00 on Friday morning in Europe.

US futures were up slightly, the euro gained against the dollar at $1.1575, and the greenback slipped against the Japanese yen, to ¥152.7950. The British pound also fell against the dollar and cost $1.3290.

Rare earths companies gained overseas

As mining stocks led losses in Europe on Friday amid developments in Beijing, the STOXX Europe Basic Resources index shed 0.78%.

This follows a rally in the US, where rare earth stocks rose considerably after China announced that it would tighten control over its exports of these materials.

The country is dominating the market for rare earths. The world’s second-largest economy accounts for 70% of the global supply of these assets that are hugely significant for defence and technological infrastructure.

Following the news, investors in the US placed their hopes on American alternatives. US rare earth and critical mineral miners’ share prices surged on Thursday, partially due to market speculation that Washington will invest more in building out a domestic supply chain.

Many of these companies have seen their prices increase for months now, with several doubling or tripling since the beginning of the year.

USA Rare Earth Inc., a firm building a domestic rare earth magnet supply chain, gained nearly 15% on Thursday. Since January, it has risen 151%.

MP Materials Corp, an American rare-earth materials company headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, also gained more than 2.4% on Thursday, while it is up 341% since January.

Another company, Denver-based Energy Fuels Inc., gained 9.4%, bring its year-to-date rise to 284%.

NioCorp Developments, which benefits from Pentagon support, gained more than 12%, Rare Element Resources Ltd gained more than 10%, and Texas Mineral Resources Corp. gained 9.6% on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Australian rare-earth mining company Lynas Rare Earths lost nearly 3.8% in the Asian trade, and Australia’s Iluka Resources lost 3.22%.

Chinese Shenghe Resources, a partly state-owned rare earths mining and processing company listed on the Shanghai stock exchange, lost 5%.

Beijing’s measures mean that companies need to apply for a licence to export products containing certain Chinese-sourced rare earth metals.

USA Rare Earth (USAR 14.99%) posted huge gains in Thursday’s trading session. The deep-sea mining specialist’s share price gained 15%, even though the Dow Jones Industrial Average index declined 0.6% in the day’s trading. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 declined 0.3%, and the Nasdaq Composite declined 0.1%.

The key factors that pushed the broader market lower today were the same ones that powered big gains for USA Rare Earth stock. China plans to cut down on its export of rare-earth minerals to the U.S., but that could present a big opportunity for USA Rare Earth.

Image source: Getty Images.

Is USA Rare Earth stock a buy right now?

China is the world’s leading supplier of rare-earth minerals. According to some estimates, the country accounts for approximately 70% of global rare-earth mineral sourcing. If relations between the U.S. and China continue to worsen, the U.S. will likely have to increase its domestic sourcing of rare-earth minerals and trade in the category with aligned countries.

USA Rare Earth’s business is still in a pre-revenue state, and that makes the company a risky investment almost by definition. This characteristic makes it riskier than more well-established mining stocks. Conversely, the company expects to begin production at its Stillwater, Oklahoma, magnet facility next year and has other projects that could shift into production mode within the next two years.

USA Rare Earth continues to be a high-risk investment, and the stock is too growth-dependent to be a good fit for risk-averse investors. On the other hand, the company’s potential to play a leading role in supplying rare-earth minerals to the U.S. makes it a potentially explosive play.

USA Rare Earth (USAR 17.77%) stock, one of a handful of start-up companies attempting to jump-start rare earth oxide mining and rare earth magnet manufacturing in the United States, soared 15.6% through 10:45 a.m. ET Thursday. And why?

China just announced new curbs on rare earth exports.

Image source: Getty Images.

What’s China up to now?

The Chinese Commerce Ministry announced Thursday that government approval will be required for exporting products containing certain rare earth metals. China dominates global mining of rare earths (69% of global production), refining of rare earth oxides (85%), and manufacture of rare earth magnets (90%) — the end goal of all this work.

For more than a decade, China has used its near-monopolies in rare earths as a lever in trade negotiations, especially with the United States. In the context of President Trump’s hefty tariffs imposed on other Chinese exports, China’s once again limiting rare earth exports to punish the U.S.

Perversely, that’s good news for a company like USA Rare Earth, which aims to produce more of this stuff domestically to fill gaps in the supply line that the lack of Chinese exports creates.

Is USA Rare Earth stock a buy?

It’s good news long term, that is. In the short term, even a full-scale Chinese embargo on rare earth exports won’t change the fact that USA Rare Earth has no revenue and is losing about $100 million a year.

Analysts do believe the company will earn a profit eventually, but no sooner than 2028. By that time, however, the Trump administration will be heading for the exits, the trade war could be over, and rare earth exports from China could be flowing freely again.

Buying USA Rare Earth stock years before it turns profitable remains highly speculative. Caveat investor, and limit your risks.

Markets are hovering in positive territory today, and while they may end up down by the end of Tuesday’s trading session, there’s a strong likelihood that USA Rare Earth (USAR 9.92%) stock will end the day higher than where the rare earths stock began. And it doesn’t even relate to any company news. Instead, the stock’s spike stems from a development regarding a metals peer.

As of 12:14 a.m. ET, shares of USA Rare Earth are up 10%.

Image source: Getty Images.

Speculation of a notable partnership isn’t just running rampant — it’s full-on sprinting

Trilogy Metals (TMQ 241.63%) is the latest beneficiary of the U.S. government’s growing enthusiasm for investing in companies focused on critical mineral production. The company, focused on copper and cobalt production, announced today that the U.S. government intends to make a $17.8 million investment in the company, which would result in an approximate 10% equity stake.

While investor interest in rare earths has soared since President Trump issued executive orders in May to shore up the nation’s supply of these critical minerals, the administration’s interest in acquiring equity stakes in these mining companies to expedite their growth has also represented a powerful catalyst — one that has led investors to gobble up USA Rare Earth stock on the belief that it too will receive an equity investment from the U.S. government.

With shares rising, what are investors to do now?

Although it certainly seems with the realm of reason that the U.S. government would pursue an equity investment in USA Rare Earth, it’s speculative at this point to predicate an investment in the company solely on this notion. Instead, potential investors should monitor the company’s progress in developing its rare earth magnet production facility — something a lot more material to a sound investment.

Ruhi Çenet, a Turkish YouTuber who’s gained a reputation for visiting some of the planet’s most hard-to-reach destinations, travelled to a place where temperatures can drop to below -60°C

An intrepid travel vlogger, who has visited the coldest inhabited place on Earth, almost lost his nose to the elements in just 15 minutes. Ruhi Çenet, a Turkish YouTuber and travel vlogger who’s gained a reputation for visiting some of the planet’s most hard-to-reach destinations, travelled to Oymyakon, in Sakha Republic, Russia, where temperatures can drop to -67.7°C, the lowest ever recorded in the Northern Hemisphere.

Oymyakon, also home of the lowest temperature recorded outside Antarctica, has (as of reports from 2024) roughly 2,000 inhabitants and lies in the Oymyakon plateau, situated in what the Guardian describes as a “bowl-shaped depression” with a dry, frosty climate.

In the video, titled The Coldest Village on Earth: Oymyakon, Ruhi flew east from Moscow over seven hours and then travelled 900km to the Siberian settlement, where a thermometer displayed an icy -60.5°C upon arrival at 2am.

Ruhi was later filmed donning more than 20 layers of clothing “just to stay alive”, including reindeer fur boots, trousers, and a coat, as he prepared to step out from a 30°C home and take on the icy elements.

In words spoken by a narrator, the vlogger, who had ice crystals forming on his eyelashes and stinging skin within seconds of being outside, explained how the settlement is so cold that mobile phones stop working, and any cars left exposed to the cold freeze in just a few hours.

Ruhi held his thumb up to the camera, showing a large, yellow blister forming on his skin, and, in two striking shots, he was also filmed holding up the frozen corpses of a wolf and what appeared to be a rabbit.

Later on in the video, in a segment covering the working day of a local cattle farmer named Yevdokiya, Ruhi’s face suddenly went numb.

In words spoken by the narrator: “I couldn’t move the muscle on the left side, like I was having facial paralysis. When my nose started freezing. Yevdokiya noticed right away.”

Next, the camera filmed a close-up of Ruhi’s nose, which, after staying outside for “just over 15 minutes”, had started to turn white along the tip in patches, an unmistakable sign of a serious condition. He asked: “Is it frostbite?”, to which the answer was a resounding, “Yeah”.

The narrator continued: “The cold shrinks the blood vessels and eventually reduces blood circulation. Without enough warmth, water inside each cell freezes into ice crystals, causing the cells to rupture and triggering a stabbing pain and tissue to die.”

Ruhi was quickly advised to cover his face and be careful or it “might turn black”. As the team rushed back to a group of buildings, it was detailed how, from that point onwards, Ruhi wasn’t able to spend more than 10 minutes at a time outside, or he would risk the frostbite getting worse.

Fortunately, Yevdokiya presented what she described as a “cure” for the condition. She held what appeared to be a medicine bottle containing aloe and alcohol, and proceeded to dip a swab in the mixture and hand it to Ruhi.

According to the narrator (who translated), she said: “You soak it like this and apply it to the area that’s frozen and don’t rub it, okay? Otherwise, you’ll damage the vessels and the capillaries and it’ll lead to sores.”

Ruhi, who proceeded to hold the swab to his nose (and filming then continued), appeared to be unscathed by his brush with frostbite by the end of the video.

Rumours across social media platforms that a huge comet is on a collision course with Earth have been circulating, with some users describing it as a major threat to humanity.

Others are debating how the comet – known as 3I/ATLAS and detected by NASA’s ATLAS telescope on July 1 – might be diverted from the Earth. Some have even gone so far as to highlight “news” of military movements and an international coordination to counter the comet before impact, prompting further alarm.

So is there any truth to these rumours and what do we know for sure?

When and how did rumours about the comet start?

Rumours began spreading after the New York Post published a story on September 29 under the headline: “‘Massive’ comet hurtling toward us is larger than previously thought, could be alien tech, scientist says: ‘It could change everything for us’.”

Users on X (formerly Twitter) circulated screenshots of the article to support their claims. One account, under the name Steven Greenstreet, wrote: “Scientists say a massive alien spaceship is hurtling towards Earth. Why aren’t more people talking about this?”

Scientists say a massive alien spaceship is hurtling towards Earth. Why aren’t more people talking about this?!?! 😱😱😱 pic.twitter.com/Q2NvVdcXa7

— Steven Greenstreet 🐷 (@MiddleOfMayhem) September 29, 2025

Another account called Dr Disclosure reposted the story, adding: “This is why all the generals are gathering!” – a reference to a September 30 meeting of US military leaders chaired by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. That post racked up more than half a million views.

This is why all the generals are gathering!!!!!! https://t.co/qzeeUAiR2P

— Dr. Disclosure (@Docneuroeo) September 29, 2025

Meanwhile, an account under the name Richard Roeper shared his concerns: “A massive comet is reportedly hurtling toward Earth at 130,000 mph! Can we stop it? I’m told there are two missions in the works – one involving the specially selected “Messiah Crew,” and one utilizing two squads, known as the Freedom Team and the Independence Team. We got this.”

A massive comet is reportedly hurtling toward Earth at 130,000 mph! Can we stop it? I’m told there are two missions in the works–one involving the specially selected “Messiah Crew,” and one utilizing two squads, known as the Freedom Team and the Independence Team. We got this. pic.twitter.com/dsbgW0giLD

— Richard Roeper (@RichardERoeper) September 29, 2025

Why do some people claim it’s an alien aircraft?

Speculation escalated, with some accounts suggesting the object was not a comet at all but in fact a spacecraft heading towards Earth.

An account under the name Lord Bebo shared statements falsely attributed to US physicist Michio Kaku, claiming the object was on the way “to conduct a reconnaissance mission, possibly with hostile intent”. The post, accompanied by an edited screenshot of a television interview with Kaku and the caption, “It might be an ALIEN probe sent to Earth” garnered more than 290,000 views and dozens of comments.

☄️ Comet stirs debate among astrophysicists & they call for urgent international attention on interstellar object 3I/ATLAS

Physicist Michio Kaku: its acceleration cannot be explained by conventional causes, and it’s approaching Earth CLOSER than expected

Professor of natural… pic.twitter.com/zEt0NO34bm

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) October 1, 2025

Similarly, another account called Astronomy Vibes suggested: “While most scientists agree it’s likely a strange comet, a few bold voices suggest it might be something more – maybe even an engineered probe from another civilization.” No evidence was provided.

🚨 Breaking Cosmic News!
Scientists have spotted a 7-mile-wide interstellar visitor — the largest of its kind ever seen — racing through our solar system. Known as 3I/ATLAS, this giant comet isn’t from around here… it comes from deep interstellar space! 🌌

What’s shocking is… pic.twitter.com/DDxOJPDlUg

— Astronomy Vibes (@AstronomyVibes) October 1, 2025

So, what are the facts?

Al Jazeera’s fact-checking agency, SANAD, investigated the claims about the comet known as 3I/ATLAS, an interstellar object, to determine whether it really poses any real threat to Earth or could even be a hostile probe.

The comet was in fact detected by NASA’s ATLAS telescope on July 1, 2025. NASA, which describes it as having “a teardrop-shaped cocoon of dust coming off its solid, icy nucleus”, confirmed that it poses no danger to Earth. It noted that the closest it has come to the Earth was about 270 million kilometres (167.8 million miles) on July 21.

The European Space Agency (ESA) also confirmed that the comet poses no threat to Earth or to any other planet, explaining that its closest distance was more than 2.5 times that between Earth and the Sun.

According to NASA, the comet will reach its closest approach to the Sun on October 30, 2025. At that point, it will be about 210 million km (130.5 million miles) from the sun, just inside the orbit of Mars.

This is a significant comet, however. According to the Hubble Space Telescope, it is travelling at about 210,000 kilometres per hour (130,500 miles per hour) – the fastest speed ever recorded for a “visitor” to our solar system.

🆕 Hubble has caught an interstellar interloper — comet 3I/ATLAS! 

Read more: https://t.co/fSIpjDYeu1 or in 🧵👇 pic.twitter.com/6dUojFwdnW

— HUBBLE (@HUBBLE_space) August 7, 2025

NASA said the comet presents a rare opportunity for scientists to study an interstellar “visitor” as it passes through the solar system.

“Hubble’s continuing observations allow astronomers to more accurately estimate the size of the comet’s nucleus,” the agency said in a statement. “Observations as of August 20, 2025, indicate that the upper limit on its diameter is 3.5 miles (5.6 km), though it could be as small as 1,444ft (440 metres) across.”

Comet 3I/ATLAS doesn’t pose a threat to Earth, but it does provide NASA scientists and spacecraft with a rare opportunity to study an interstellar comet as it passes through our solar system. ☄ https://t.co/B1MkBRZuT4 pic.twitter.com/wAmBUEte8l

— NASA Solar System (@NASASolarSystem) September 30, 2025

As for the quotes attributed to physicist Michio Kaku, SANAD found no evidence supporting them. The image circulating online was taken from an older interview with US outlet Nation News on February 20, 2025 – months before the discovery of 3I/ATLAS.

Will a huge “city-killer” asteroid collide with Earth in 2032? The odds don’t rule it out. So what can we do about it? I appeared on @NewsNation‘s On Balance with @LelandVittert to discuss the possibilities. #asteroid #asteroidimpact pic.twitter.com/ZHYi982SEi

— Dr. Michio Kaku (@michiokaku) February 20, 2025

Sibiu, Romania’s medieval treasure

Sibiu, the former capital of Transylvania, proved a wonderful place to visit. The city’s old town is on a hill, with every other building in the three main squares and the sidestreets seemingly a historic monument, dominated by the medieval Lutheran cathedral of Saint Mary. The characteristic design of attic windows makes it clear why Sibiu is called “the town of a thousand eyes”, and the Teutsch Haus provides a brilliant history of the region and the Transylvanian Saxons. The old town is crammed full of restaurants and cafes, and down by the river there is a local market with giant aubergines, tomatoes and peppers. For an evening glass, Wine Not has a vast selection of Romanian (and Moldovan) wines, and a black cat to talk to.
Barbara Forbes

Wrocław, Poland’s buzzy student city

Wrocław has the perfect mix of quirkiness and beauty to make for a cracking affordable city break. The hefty student population gives the city a real buzz, from the boat and beach bars along the River Oder (try Forma Płynna beach bar), to the delicious Georgian bakeries (stop at Piekarnia Gruzińska PURI – on Facebook – for pastries on the way to checking out the painted backyards of the Nadodrze neighbourhood). While tourists concentrate around the huge central square, exploring the edge of the old town reaps rewards, like Pub Drukarnia (delicious Litovel Czech beer) or Stacja Breslau bistro under the rail arches on Wojciecha Bogusławskiego street.
Matt Lunt

Helsinki’s world-class architecture

Our knowledge of Helsinki stemmed mainly from the films of director Aki Kaurismäki (Drifting Clouds, The Man Without a Past etc), so discovering it’s not all dockyards and cold war-era bars came as a welcome surprise. Instead, Helsinki features green spaces, coastal views, accessible islands and world-class architecture. It’s the latter we came for: from a church built into rock to state-of-the-art community space Oodi library; from the mid-century Didrichsen museum to architect Alvar Aalto’s organic modernism. But don’t forget to eat – whether it’s brunch at Levain, Michelin-starred invention at Grön or simply an exceptional korvapuusti (cinnamon roll to you and me).
David M

Marseille is fun for all the family

Marseille fitted the diverse requirements for our family city break. Warm weather, beaches, extraordinary street art, sea kayaking and amazing walking in the Calanques satisfied teenagers and parents alike. My favourites were the Mucem (Musée des Civilisations de l’Europe et de la Méditerranée), the winding streets of Le Panier and the sense of the place being a melting pot of cultures. We found the locals to be friendly as they encouraged our attempts to speak French, and there\s a good transport system of trams, metro and buses. We got there easily on Eurostar and TGV train and stayed at the Aparthotel Adagio.
Evie

Berlin’s hidden design gems

Although I’ve been travelling to Berlin for nearly 20 years, I’m still making new discoveries. The headlines, like the Brandenburg Gate and the glass dome on the Reichstag, are definitely worth seeing, but there are also hidden treasures, such as the futuristic Ludwig Erhard Haus, designed by Nicolas Grimshaw, whose steel-clad exterior is just the aperitif for some jaw-dropping architecture inside. Or the ruins of St Michael’s church, which was separated from its parishioners by the Berlin Wall. And try to bag a place on the tour of the ESMT business school that once housed East Germany’s elite. The socialist stained glass and GDR coat of arms mosaic are real showstoppers.
James Carson

A dumpling and a beer in Vilnius, Lithuania

We’ve just spent three nights in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius whose old town is easily walkable with plenty of churches, museums and other sights. We indulged in local specialities like kvass, a drink made from fermented rye bread, and cepelinai, which are potato dumplings shaped like airships and filled with minced pork. A half litre of beer (about €5) was ideal with moreish kepta duona, fingers of deep-fried black bread served with a garlic dip. A walk up hundreds of steps to the Three Crosses for views over the city burned excess calories. We stayed at Domus Maria, a former monastery, near the Gate of Dawn.
Helen Jackson

Why Maastricht is a must

A three-hour drive from Calais, or two-hour train journey from Brussels changing at Liège-Guillemins, is the Dutch city of Maastricht. Compact, largely flat (handy for an arthritic retiree) and utterly delightful. As a university town, we enjoyed the friendly, lively vibe but this did not distract from its charm and its history. The cloth market on Wednesdays and the bric-a-brac market at the weekend in the main square are amazing (we bought a milk churn!), the frites at the surrounding cafes were great and the beer was varied and delicious. Boekhandel Dominicanen (a bookshop in a converted middle-ages abbey) was certainly a highlight.
Bruce Horton

Beer spa in Olomouc, Czech Republic

Olomouc in the Czech Republic is an utter delight. Gleaming spires and domes, two old town squares, enchanting cobbled lanes, trams and its own astronomical clock. It also has a Unesco-recognised holy trinity column, which was built to mark the end of a plague in the early 18th century. A two-hour train ride from Prague, Olomouc is markedly less touristy than the Czech capital. Two great places to enjoy a beer were Saint Venceslav’s brewery, where there is a beer spa with a sauna scented with hops; and Twinburg, next to the Moravian cycle path, which serves delicious craft ales. This is a city I felt had been put on Earth specially for me.
Jack Anderton

Polar nights in Tromsø, Norway’s ‘Arctic capital’

As a Scot who once sought drawn-out summer nights, I now lean into the opposite with fervour. Winter in Tromsø, Norway – the “Arctic capital” – is for travellers who embrace the long, dark nights and are keen to meddle with their circadian rhythms. The polar night, when the sun doesn’t rise above the horizon, starts at the end of November and finishes in mid-January. Experience this unworldly extended twilight – the blue hour – from about 9am to 2pm. The Fjellheisen cable car and silent whale-watching with Brim Explorer are two recommended activities.
Aimee Lawrence

Winning tip: blessed are the cheese markets in Alkmaar, the Netherlands

I recently visited Alkmaar, 35 minutes north of Amsterdam by train, which has waterways, picturesque pedestrian-friendly cobbled streets, chiming churches, excellent food (De Heeren Van Sonoy, Stadskaffee Laurens and Patisserie Elhorst include gluten-free options), and markets (don’t miss the cheese market for a true Dutch spectacle). We hired bicycles from Pesie for an easy trip on well-marked paths through beautiful pine forest and the Schoorlse Duinen (Dunes) nature reserve before heading back to town via a well-deserved ice-cream on the beach at Bergen aan Zee.
Nicola

Gustavo Dudamel has begun his tale of two cities.

As Dickens prophetically reminds us, ours is hardly the first age of wisdom and of foolishness, the first epoch of belief and of incredulity. Dudamel’s great challenge is to make his 17th and final season as music director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic — and his prelude season before taking over the New York Philharmonic (in September he officially became designate music and artistic director) — the best of musical times for both cities.

The opening concerts for the two orchestras were two weeks apart, the Big Apple having come first. The main works on the New York-centric program were by two great 20th century composers, Bartók and Charles Ives, who were treated as outsiders by the city’s musical establishments during their lifetimes.

The performances were impressive. An orchestra that has a reputation for being difficult was responsive. If I read the room right, there was a genuine, if somewhat guarded, sense of optimism from a welcoming crowd.

Following a tradition he started with his first season in L.A., Dudamel opened with a newly commissioned work, Leilehua Lanzilotti’s “of light and stone.” He struck instant sonic gold with this mystical evocation of Hawaii, wondrous in sound, Lanzilotti, a hopeful good start.

Dudamel has a different look these days when he walks out on stage for an L.A. Phil concert after he’s been away for a while. Thursday night at Walt Disney Concert Hall, he again seemed ever so slightly hesitant, as if not knowing what to expect now that his leaving has become manifest. But greeted by a full house’s demonstratively embracing thankful enthusiasm, he beamed, the hesitant posture turning into ownership.

The conductor opened his farewell season with Ellen Reid’s “Earth Between Oceans,” a joint commission bridging his two orchestral families.

(Timothy Norris / Los Angeles Philharmonic)

The new work this year is Ellen Reid’s “Earth Between Oceans,” and it is Dudamel’s first effort at bringing together what he calls his two families.

Reid, who is herself bicoastal between L.A. and New York, narrates, through astonishing orchestral properties and powers, an environmental tale of her two cities. The work is a joint commission with the New York Philharmonic; Dudamel will take it east in the spring.

Earth, air, water and fire are Reid’s subject matters, which she translates into four movements that cover a New York winter, an aerial approach to Manhattan’s noise and quiet, the Altadena and Pacific Palisades conflagrations, ending on a sort of surfboard ride over crashing blue waves. With the help of a wordless Los Angeles Master Chorale, Reid tells the story through ever-surprising instrumental evocation.

Nothing, however, sounds like you might expect in Reid’s massive orchestral soundscape capable of holding a listener in tight grip for 30 minutes. Is that percussive pounding in earth the ground moving under our feet and the cello solo snowy Central Park? I don’t know how she does it, but I immediately bought into weird sounds from the chorus indicating something words can’t express about what those New York skyscrapers are up to. The effect of what sounded like ticking clocks going astray felt like an inviting dip in the lake.

Dudamel ended the concert with Richard Strauss’ “Alpine Symphony,” 125 orchestral musicians schlepping up the mountain, finding spiritual ecstasy at the summit and getting drenched on the way down, a self-satisfied drinking in of nature with every step. It is an astonishing, so to speak, over-the-top score, which you either love or abhor for its instrumental vulgarity.

Love was in order Thursday. Dudamel first performed “Alpine Symphony” at Disney in 2008, a year before beginning as music director. He jogged up the mountain and back, full of beans, showing off but also sharing his enthusiasm and demonstrating a skill that gave confidence that this 20-something conductor had the chops.

Dudamel’s performance of Strauss’ “Alpine Symphony” demonstrated the L.A. Phil’s distinctive immediacy compared with his more formal European interpretations.

(Timothy Norris / Los Angeles Philharmonic)

Last summer, I heard Dudamel conduct the “Alpine” with the Vienna Philharmonic at the Salzburg Festival. The playing was sumptuous but formal and distant. These were the Alps as seen from a comfortable gondola taking in the view, and what a view, indeed.

The L.A. Phil sound, on the other hand, reveled in being-there, huffing-and-puffing immediacy. A rainstorm was a rainstorm: wet. The pastures replete with cowbells weren’t so much scenic as earthy, the real thing.

The orchestra sounded rapt and ready for ecstasy Thursday. There are two new first-chair players. A member of the orchestra’s second violin section, Melody Ye Yuan, has become her section’s principal. Ryan Roberts is the new principal oboe, and he had a luminous solo in the “Alpine.”

It was only after Roberts, who grew up in Santa Monica, won the L.A. Phil blind audition for principal oboe that Dudamel discovered he had just hired away a rising star in what is about to become his New York Philharmonic. But it’s all in the big new family.

What is international legitimacy?

States have always needed to guarantee their existence and sovereignty; law and security became, therefore, the key to power dynamics in international relations. As the survival of the states has depended directly on the proper handling of their interrelationship, the international stage soon prevailed over the internal one as the reason for their existence.

The international society, anarchic by nature, has never allowed a previous binding legal order or even the ruling of a central authority. This amorphous and pulverized society has demanded from states the set of strategies aimed at the prevailing of its force in the world system, and due to various standards of expression and capacity they own, some states have used its legitimacy as a way of equating their place in the world and signing their international insertion.

If the international theatre is anarchic, the reasons of state are consequently selfish; nations have been conducting their mutual relations according to the customs originating from the accommodation of power. Paradoxically, a dialectic between sovereignties and the progressive interdependence of nations emerged as a phenomenon that has evinced the potential of international socialization, as well as the existence of a minimum coexisting ruled world community.

Considering that the international legal order is sovereignty-based and that there are no transcendent values—not even peace, justice, and equity—that can affirm its basic rule, interstate relations depend on intricate power and policy games.

Sovereign legal orders aimed at self-defense and security strategies have put in check the legal formalism in favor of realism in international society. This is the main characteristic of the international order that makes it entirely different from the internal one: the prevailing of policy over law. No matter how a domestic legal order forces political struggles, there will always be a founding rule that provides the state legal validity and a minimal government structure, with vertical authority, that enables the subsistence of its society.

On the other hand, international order, even surrounded by world organizations, law, and treaties, can’t do without policy, precisely because of being anarchic, horizontal, amorphous, and unequal. So, for prevailing in the strongly political world theater, states have to use something beyond pure international legal elements as a non-conventional way of equating power—authority, or rather, legitimacy.

This is not an easy task. The concept of international legitimacy is nebulous itself, as it gravitates beyond the borders of morality, ideology, and law, and it can simply be defined as a sort of moral acceptability that justifies states’ authority. Neither diplomacy nor international law can provide sufficient elements or concepts for defining it.

2. Why do nations need international legitimacy?

The friction between power and law is what moves interstate relationships, and it is responsible for encouraging states’ constant dissatisfaction concerning the international system status quo. Decolonization in Africa and Asia, the non-aligned movement, and the third-world onslaught against the international financial system are all phenomena that emphasize this friction.

Even the assumption of stability in the international system and its binding rules can’t mitigate the effects of the friction between power and law. Sovereignty remains the pillar of world relations rather than international law. States don’t abide by rules unless it seems convenient, helpful, and adaptable to their strategic geopolitical calculation.

The international society is a very heterogeneous environment in terms of power and capacities. Consent—and not consensus—is what moves interstate relationship structure, marked by an absolutely unequal distribution of power, which leads to its cyclical freeze and to the legitimacy crisis of hegemonic states.

Whether hegemonic or peripheral, states depend on the consent of the others to achieve their strategic aims. Tradition, besides consent, also aggregates nations, and this is why the international law itself is based on a tradition derived from natural law. It is no coincidence that nations handle their diplomatic strategies of insertion and chase for consent using their reasons of state—the real meaning of their political traditions.

The U.S. molded its political tradition and the basis of its international legitimacy on hegemonic leadership. The relations of power between the U.S. and the rest of the world have always followed this premise, but President Trump’s recent actions are undermining the consent achieved by Washington, as well as its own international insertion. He seems to ignore the fact that, like any other nation, the U.S. depends on the consent of the world community to keep its leadership role.

3. Hegemony: the U.S. international insertion

Since its very early years the U.S. reason of state was forged in a biblical and messianic character based on Puritanism. The resulting collective consciousness led the Americans towards expansionism in their own territory and afterwards to international hegemony.

The U.S. arrogated to itself a leading role in the world on behalf of a supposedly elevated social order, responsible for conducting progress and democracy wherever needed. Based on the idea that the U.S. was divinely ordained to preserve the unequivocal rights given to men by God—equality, liberty, life, and happiness—and to promote democracy ideals, the world consented to the Manifest Destiny Doctrine, the Monroe Doctrine, and the Roosevelt Corollary as acceptable sources of Washington’s international legitimacy.

European countries, which had long resisted American initiatives in Africa, Latin America, and the Pacific, now accepted Washington’s supremacy. The world wars gradually affirmed the international community’s consent to U.S. authority, side by side with the Soviet Union during the bipolar era, and now as a hegemonic nation struggling for world power with earlier peripheral China.

The U.S. hegemonic legitimacy would not have survived the Cold War if it wasn’t for the consent derived from Washington’s objective behavior and respect for formal institutions like NATO, the Security Council of the U.N., or even the accepted currency in the world’s financial system.

Above consent, the West block nourished the belief that the policy of the U.S. really supported free peoples who were resisting attempted subjugation by the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. Both the Truman and Eisenhower Doctrines gained authority by the acceptance of half of the world, and this consolidated U.S. leadership in Europe, Latin America, and the Middle and Far East.

Reagan’s patient determination on reversing the course of American policy abroad by strengthening Washington’s defenses and recapturing world supremacy from Moscow was rewarded with the dissolution of the Soviet Union. However, with the end of the Cold War, the U.S. entered uncharted territory, as it meant the end of the divided world legitimacy shared hitherto with the Soviet Union.

During the Cold War, the U.S. could cite the threat of Soviet retaliation as a reason to avoid intervening in the affairs of other countries. With that threat gone, American leaders, facing an unprecedented responsibility, would have to weigh each prospective intervention on its own merits.

If one country attacked another, should the U.S. defend the victim? If the government of a country oppressed its own people, should the U.S. move to stop the oppression? These questions—and the answers American presidents gave to them—would reshape U.S. international legitimacy and its further foreign policy, as well as the world order itself.

As the only superpower still standing, the U.S. power could not preserve American strategists from having to make difficult decisions about how to use such resources. Inheriting the chaos left by the breakup of the Soviet Union, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden outlined a “new world order” based in the general and accepted principle of deterring international aggression.

American unilateralism, strongly endorsed by the 9/11 terrorist attacks, made the world accept fully the “global policeman” role the U.S. had been playing since the 1991 invasion of Iraq. In playing the role of “world cop,” strategists and advisers of both Republican and Democratic presidents asserted the right to the preventive use of force.

In other words, the U.S., far stronger militarily and economically than any other nation, played its role as supporter or final arbiter of most international disputes. Iraq, Kosovo, Serbia, the Middle East, Somalia, and Ukraine have all faced direct or indirect interventions by the U.S. by reference to international law or, last but not least, to the world’s same wavelength.

President Donald Trump seems to despise the highly interventionist and hegemonic legacy that the U.S. accumulated in the last 30 years—in his view a heavy and useless burden that Washington should no longer support—as well as the eighty-year-old world order and the international law system itself.

4. Trump’s will: a new world order?

Conceiving the world as a dynamic, integrated system has always meant the difference between success and failure in the decisions and actions of great leaders throughout history.

Once reappointed for another term in the U.S. presidency, Donald Trump was granted the opportunity of choosing between success and failure. Surprisingly, it looks like he has chosen to face the world not in a global manner, as a wise statesman, but from an absolutely anarchic, fickle, and irregular point of view.

This is an equivocal perspective: the three-century successful premise based on the opposition between the internal order and the international anarchy can’t find support in the present world. Although the international order is anarchic, some institutional, behavioral, and subjective elements that shape regular empirical situations come from it.

Modern international law, unlike its formalist classical matrix, aims to shape social reality, not only on the global scale but also at the core of the states. The present organization of the international system has to do with both the power and interest of the wealthier nations and the peripheral ones’ sense of security and belonging to the international community.

In general, nations yearn for sovereignty, formal equality, human rights, economic development, stable commerce, and a healthy environment. In a nutshell, both peripheral and powerful states yearn for stability in world order, and the hegemonic ones are even more interested in promoting it. Besides being the main beneficiaries of the world order stability, they also have enormous influence on shaping the content of international rules and strengthening global organizations.

Thus, it’s quite impossible to conceive a project of a new world order under Trump’s actions. His strategic equivocation is evident: instead of maintaining the U.S. leadership, the measures of international disaggregation so far are undermining Washington’s legitimacy.

The international community expects the USA to be the USA. Despite the emergence of Russia, China, and the Global South as alternative centers of power, the world still expects genuine leadership from Washington, and this role requires the acceptance of predictable patterns in states’ relationships that only global governance shaped by international law and systemic persistence can provide.

Denying the international system is definitely not the way to improve a new world order, and it will result exactly in the opposite of Trump’s objective—“make America great again”—insofar as the U.S.’s global leadership depends on its strategic insertion into the global regime.

5. The U.S.’s international legitimacy towards deterioration

While Washington is stepping back, Beijing is reinforcing its global insertion and searching constantly for the international community’s consent and for a global leadership role. The Chinese strategists and advisers are fully aware that the observance of international law and the pursuit of the world’s consent are the keys to consistent international legitimacy.

In the daily routine of international system life, large numbers of agreements and customs are complied with. However, the need is felt in the hectic interplay of world affairs for some kind of regulatory framework or rules network within which the game can be played, and international law fulfills that requirement. States feel this necessity because it imports an element of stability and predictability into the situation.

As nations are usually involved in disagreements or disputes, it is handy to have recourse to the rules of international law since at least there is a common frame of reference—a mutually understandable vocabulary book that suggests possible solutions.

The element of reciprocity at work acts as a powerful weapon of gathering and forbearance among nations. States quite often do not pursue one particular course of action that might bring them short-term gains because it could disrupt the mesh of reciprocal tolerance, which could very well bring long-term disadvantages. This constitutes an inducement to states to act reasonably and moderate demands in the expectation that this will similarly encourage other states to act reasonably and so avoid confrontations.

Observing the international law and behaving according to the world system by mutual agreement is the path to improve international legitimacy and to influence and to alter law patterns or customs in the international community.

International legitimacy and international law—and not morality, ethics, or even political mottos—are the elements directly used by states for pursuing their strategic objectives and claims.

“Making America great again” is an empty political motto that definitely can’t subsidize American international legitimacy. Behaving objectively, but diplomatically, in terms of power and showing respect for formal world institutions was surely the way the U.S. forged its supremacy and conquered the consent of the international community.

What made America “great” was precisely its reason of state, based on the tradition of hegemonic leadership. American strategists have always known how to make Washington’s authority and legitimacy prevail over the intricate power and policy games and over the expectations of the coexisting world community.

American legitimacy could even resist the last 30 years of unilateralism and preventive use of force, when the world community fully questioned U.S. leadership, because the strategists and advisers of Washington have never forgotten the need for world socialization and the existence of a ruled world system.

Trump’s foreign policy, contrary to the Chinese or Russian ones, ignores that the consent of the world community is essential for a nation to keep its leadership role and that the world order won’t forgo stability and its institutional and behavioral elements.

The world is a dynamic integrated system that shapes social reality at the core of the states. Trump’s stubbornness in the brutal opposition between the internal and the international order, and in finding enemies everywhere, even among traditional friends, will surely lead the U.S. legitimacy towards deterioration, besides putting the country against the Earth.

Markets may be nudging slightly higher today, offering investors the hope of ending the week on a positive note, but the same can’t be said for rare earth stock USA Rare Earth (USAR -3.85%). While the company hasn’t reported anything negative, news related to a rare earth peer has USA Rare Earth investors heading for the exits.

As of 2:44 p.m. ET, shares of USA Rare Earth are down 3.5%, recovering from their earlier decline of 10%.

Image source: Getty Images.

Rare earth businesses in the U.S. are growing, and USA Rare Earth investors aren’t happy

Thanks to its holding in ReElement Technologies, American Resources (AREC) announced a 141% expansion of its critical mineral refining facility located in Indiana. With the expansion, the company now has near-term annual refining capacity of over 200 metric tons of ultrapure separated defense elements and rare earth oxides of 99.9% to 99.999% purity.

Nearing completion of its rare earth magnet production facility, USA Rare Earth has emerged as one of the key players among those involved in rare earth elements production. The company has drawn considerable interest from investors over the past year as President Trump has issued executive orders addressing a commitment to shoring up the domestic supply of rare earths.

Is now as good time to dig into USA Rare Earth stock?

Instead of digging deeply into the news from American Resources, investors in USA Rare Earth likely responded to the news with a knee-jerk reaction and trimmed their positions, surmising that the growth prospects of USA Rare Earth is now impeded. For USA Rare Earth shareholders, though, today’s announcement shouldn’t do much to sway them that the bull case is broken.

Of course, there are plenty of risks that remain for USA Rare Earth with the construction of its magnet production facility, and the company’s success is far from guaranteed. But if you were optimistic about the prospects of USA Rare Earth yesterday, nothing has changed. In fact, today’s pullback provides a great chance to build your position even further.

HE was the down-to-earth Yorkshireman with one of the most famous gestures in sport.

The way cricket’s most famous umpire Dickie Bird gave batsmen their marching orders — lifting his arm, oh so slowly, index finger outstretched — became his trademark.

7

7

Miner’s son Dickie, who has died at the age of 92, was as much a part of British summers as, well, the sound of bat on ball.

He will be remembered as the man whose popularity broke down the divide between the game’s officials and players — also winning him a huge army of fans way beyond the boundary rope.

Generation after generation watched as Dickie, real name Harold Dennis Bird, umpired 66 tests and 69 one-day internationals, including three World Cup finals, with fairness and humour while reining in the most cantankerous of players.

Dickie, who never married, is expected to leave his multi-million- pound fortune — most of it made when he published his autobiography in 1997 — to children’s hospitals which he often visited.

After his death was announced by Yorkshire County Cricket Club, tributes flooded in for the lord of LBW — when umpire adjudges ball to have hit leg before wicket.

A club statement read: “Dickie Bird enjoyed an illustrious career as an international umpire, writing his name into history as the most famous and popular official in the game’s history.

“He is synonymous with Yorkshire cricket, where he has been one of the most loyal supporters.”

The club named the former Yorkshire batsman as its president in 2014 and said it was a role he held with “pride and distinction” as the club won two country championships during his tenure.

It added that Dickie, awarded an MBE in 1986 and OBE in 2012, had become known “not only for his umpiring excellence but also his eccentricities and warmth”.

Leading the tributes was Yorkshire and England cricket great Sir Geoffrey Boycott.

‘Never officious’

The legendary opening batsman said of the umpiring great: “Dickie was a character, always fun. He was respected, admired and loved. A cricket icon.

“He was brilliant because he made a lot of good decisions but also he had humour and a firmness. He could handle players.

“You could talk to him. He would listen. But chatting him up did not change his mind. No chance. He would laugh with you instead.

“He would never be officious. He just had a way of defusing situations. That was his strength, why he was rated all over the world as the best.”

Boycott first met Dickie in 1955, when they played for Barnsley Cricket Club — and the pair were also friends there with another Yorkshireman who later found fame, the late TV host Sir Michael Parkinson. The three would remain pals for life.

He added of Dickie’s cricket: “I was slightly in awe, nearly every time he went out to bat he would score a 50.

“I was shocked when he would come up to me and say, ‘Put my gloves on for me, Gerald’. I would say, ‘My name’s not Gerald, it’s Geoffrey’. It made no difference because he would say, ‘OK, put the gloves on for me Gerald’. He called me Gerald for years.

Former England captain and opening bat Graham Gooch also has fond memories of Dickie — a­nd the time one of his shots struck him during a match against Australia at Old Trafford in 1985.

7

7

7

Gooch told talkSPORT: “He tried to get out of the way of the straight drive but it hit him on the ankle. He wasn’t averse to making a bit of a song and dance about things — and he had to go off for treatment.”

Dickie was also in the middle when Gooch played his most famous innings — scoring 333 against India at Lord’s in 1990.

But Gooch added: “Things always happened to Dickie in the field. At Headingley, once they had a leaking pipe, right where he was standing, coming up like a sprinkler. It could only happen to him.”

BBC cricket correspondent Jonathan Agnew said of Dickie: “He was a terrific umpire, the players loved him.”

Others taking to social media to pay respects ranged from ex-Prime Minister David Cameron to former Liverpool and Nottingham Forest striker Stan Collymore.

Dickie was born in Barnsley — where he still lived before his death, although he swapped a two-up, two-down terrace with outside toilet for a luxury 16th-century four-bedroom cottage on the edge of the Pennines.

His dad Harold worked in the coal mines from the age of 13 until 65, but wanted better for his son.

Dickie was a character, always fun. He was respected, admired and loved. A cricket icon.

Sir Geoffrey Boycott

Dickie said: “My father would not let me go down the mine. ‘No way!’ he said. He instilled in me that I would play sport for a living.

“He would get up at four each day and go to the pit and when he came home in the afternoon, although tired, would spend hours with me playing cricket and football.”

Dickie’s teenage years at Barnsley Cricket Club were happy ones, as were the friendships he made with Boycott and Parkinson.

He wept as he recalled his final conversation with Parky, the day before his friend’s death in August 2023, aged 88.

Dickie said: “We cracked a few jokes together, we had a few tears in our eyes and we said goodbye, goodbye to each other at the end of the phone call as if we had this feeling that we wouldn’t see each other again and we said goodbye and that was it.

“It was so sad when I heard the news [of his death]. I slumped in my chair and shed tears.”

Another childhood pal was Tommy Taylor, the England and Manchester United centre forward, who died in the Munich air crash of 1958.

Two years earlier, Dickie had made his first-class debut for Yorkshire as a right-hand batsman.

Fervent royalist

He left the club after three years, and spent three more years with Leicestershire before a knee injury forced him to hang up his bat and he switched to umpiring.

He became the first umpire to attract queues of autograph hunters and was so popular with the females that women hung pairs of pants on his statue in his home town.

So popular was he in Barnsley that a local car dealership gave him a motor emblazoned with his name, urging drivers to follow him to their showroom. On the driver’s side they painted him sat at the wheel in his umpiring whites.

Dickie was a fervent royalist who met Queen Elizabeth II 29 times and remembered the time he had lunch with her in 1990.

He also told how he was so nervous about lunch that he turned up at the gates of Buckingham Palace more than four hours early.

He said: “The Queen laughed when I told her and said, ‘You better have a drink’.

“Prince Edward joined us, we had a magnificent lunch, and then it was just the Queen and I in the lounge all afternoon.

7

7

“She had a lovely sense of humour. We talked about cricket and horse racing. She said, ‘We think the world of you and we think you do a good job’. That were the best day of my life.”

The pair then kept in touch. “I had a letter from her a fortnight before she died,” Dickie said after her death in September 2022, aged 96.

“She asked about my health, ‘How are you keeping?’, I used to write back and say, ‘You need to keep going, Ma’am. You’ve got to get there — 100 if you can.

“She was the rock of this country. Magnificent.”

It was just the Queen and I in the lounge all afternoon. We talked about cricket and horse racing. She said ‘We think the world of you and we think you do a good job’. That were the best day
of my life.

Dickie Bird

Dickie was an ambassador for the Children’s Heart Surgery Fund at Leeds General Infirmary and is expected to leave his money to kids’ hospitals after being reduced to tears during visits across the UK.

It is not known how big his estate is but humble Dickie — who counted a £5 glass of wine at his local restaurant as a treat — donated £35,000 to London’s Great Ormond Street Hospital, £70,000 to Barnsley Hospital and £30,000 to the children’s fund at Leeds General.

He said: “When I visit these hospitals and see sick little babies needing surgery, or cut from their groin to their neck after heart operations, I break down in tears. I am not ashamed to admit it.”

His money-spinning, self-titled autobiography sold more than a book about Princess Diana, after her death the same year.

But ever-modest Dickie said: “Never in my wildest dreams did I think it would go to the bestsellers’ list, and beat even Diana’s book.”

His devotion to cricket left little time for much else, and he admitted he regretted never marrying and having children.

He said during the Covid lockdown: “If I miss having something in life, it’s having a family. I’ve had girlfriends. I nearly married twice. But I never married because in cricket you are never at home. I thought it would never work.

“It would have been wonderful to have a lad and watch him play. I missed that. But you can’t have everything. I gave myself to cricket, and it has given me a real good life.”

Shares of USA Rare Earth (USAR 7.86%) spiked higher by as much as 15.6% in early trading today. The move comes after commentary on a JPMorgan podcast created optimism that the company could be the next in line for government investment following the landmark deal with MP Materials announced recently.

What JPMorgan said

In the internal podcast, JPMorgan’s co-head of mid-cap mergers and acquisitions, Andrew Castaldo, discussed the recent MP Materials deal and said JPMorgan believes that “there’s a whole slew of different critical minerals” that “the administration is also focused on, that could potentially be ripe for this type of collaboration.” He also noted that “we’ve had no less than 100 calls with clients to talk about the MP transaction as well as what this means for other industries.”

What it could mean for USA Rare Earth

It’s natural for investors to hear this kind of commentary and conclude that USA Rare Earth could be next. After all, the company is on track to begin producing rare-earth magnets at its Stillwater, Oklahoma, facility in 2026.

That will help reduce America’s dependence on foreign-sourced rare-earth magnets. The company plans to use the near-term revenue and earnings from magnet production to ultimately develop the Round Top Mountain in Texas, which it controls the mining rights to, to provide its own supply of rare-earth materials for magnet production.

Image source: Getty Images.

Clearly, it will take time and likely a lot of capital to fulfill the plan. Given the strategic importance of securing a domestic supply of rare-earth materials and magnets, it’s perfectly feasible that the current administration could also consider providing some form of support to USA Rare Earth.