Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Volume 21 Number 1 Article 3 11-1-1987 United States Strategic Mineral Policy Larry J. Bradfish Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Larry J. Bradfish, United States Strategic Mineral Policy, 21 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 107 (1987). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr/vol21/iss1/3 This Notes and Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. UNITED STATES STRATEGIC MINERAL POLICY I. INTRODUCTION The United States is dependent on foreign sources for many of its strategic minerals.' In 1985, for example, this country imported more than ninety percent of its columbium, manganese, mica, strontium, baux- ite, cobalt, tantalum and platinum group metals.' Historically, the United States has relied on several politically unstable or repressive re- gimes for some of these strategic mineral supplies. For example, in the early part of this decade, the Republic of South Africa was the dominant source of American imports of chromium, manganese and platinum group metals.3 The United States also imported much of its cobalt from Zaire during the 1980's.4 During this same period, Chile was this coun- try's largest copper supplier.5 Despite abusive human rights practices6 in these mineral-rich countries, the United States has continued to import their minerals, and thus support them economically, while offering only token signals of disapproval of these countries' human rights abuses.