“‘Our Minerals Could Be Used to Annex Us’: Why Canada Doesn’t Want U.S. Mining

When people in rural parts of Canada heard that a major mining project backed by the U.S. Pentagon was coming to their communities, the reaction wasn’t excitement—it was concern. And not just about the usual environmental issues like open‑pit mining or water contamination. Residents began asking a bigger question: could foreign involvement in extracting Canada’s critical minerals threaten their country’s sovereignty and long-term future?
This striking idea—“our minerals could be used to annex us”—has become the lens through which many Canadians view U.S. investments in their mining sector. It’s not just local worries; it’s a national conversation about resources, control, and geopolitics.
The Mine That Sparked a Debate
The debate started in Quebec with Lomiko Metals’ proposal for a large graphite mine in La Petite‑Nation, an area known for its lakes, forests, and small-town charm. Locals feared the mine would disrupt the environment and their way of life.
But the real spark came when news broke that the U.S. Department of Defense had invested millions in the project through the Defense Production Act Investment Program. Suddenly, this wasn’t just about jobs or local development—it was about strategic resource control.
In August 2025, a referendum showed 95% of locals opposed the mine, highlighting how deeply the project clashed with community sentiment.
Why Canada’s Minerals Are So Important
Canada is a treasure trove of critical minerals like nickel, lithium, cobalt, copper, rare earth elements, and graphite—essential for electric vehicles, clean energy, and even military hardware.
For the U.S., which wants to reduce reliance on China for these resources, Canada is a logical partner. Investments in Canadian mines are part of a broader strategy to secure a North American supply chain for critical minerals.
Through the Canada–U.S. Joint Action Plan on Critical Minerals, both governments coordinate on mining projects and technology development. But even with official cooperation, many Canadians worry about how much influence a foreign power should have over their resources.
Sovereignty and Historical Skepticism
For many Canadians, the concern isn’t just economics or environment—it’s sovereignty. There’s long-standing unease about letting foreign governments, even allies, control natural resources that are vital to the nation’s economy and security.
Past U.S. political statements about resource-rich regions, like Greenland, have fueled these fears. So when a Pentagon-backed project emerges in Canada, it can feel like more than a business deal—it can feel like a loss of control over national assets.
Balancing Economics and Independence
Canada exports huge amounts of minerals to the U.S.—a relationship worth tens of billions of dollars annually. These minerals feed industries like defense, advanced manufacturing, and clean energy.
But Ottawa wants to make it clear: access for the U.S. is not guaranteed. Canada aims to diversify partnerships and retain autonomy over its resources. In other words, Canada wants to cooperate without becoming dependent.
Local Resistance and Broader Implications
The Quebec graphite mine is a microcosm of a bigger issue. Locals aren’t just worried about the land—they’re worried about who controls their resources and for whose benefit.
Communities increasingly support sustainable economic models, eco-tourism, and local development instead of foreign-driven extraction projects. They argue that Canada’s natural wealth should benefit Canadians first, and not just serve international strategic needs.
Collaboration or Conflict?
As demand for critical minerals surges globally, Canada faces a choice:
Partner closely with the U.S. to strengthen North American supply chains, or
Push back and diversify its partnerships to protect sovereignty.
Both paths carry risks. Collaboration could bring investment and jobs, but may deepen fears of foreign control. Resistance may protect autonomy, but could slow down economic development.
Conclusion: More Than Just Minerals
The phrase “‘our minerals could be used to annex us’” isn’t hyperbole—it captures a real anxiety about control, identity, and power. Canada’s minerals aren’t just economic assets—they’re national assets, shaping the country’s future, environment, and global standing.
How Canada manages its resources in the coming years will reflect not only its economic strategy but also its values: sovereignty, sustainability, and self-determination in a rapidly changing world