In January 2026, the geopolitical lexicon acquired a new term: the Donroe Doctrine. Coined in a January 2026 Axios report, the phrase describes a noticeable shift in U.S. foreign and economic policy under National Security Advisor Ayanna Donroe. Where past doctrines prioritized ideologies or territorial alliances, Donroe’s construct orbits around strategic control of three increasingly convergent domains—minerals, oil, and artificial intelligence (AI). This trichotomy now underpins a modern form of economic deterrence and supply chain sovereignty. As digital systems increasingly rely on physical resources—and vice versa—the Donroe Doctrine signals a deterrence framework intertwined with industrial policy and resource nationalism.
The Strategic Triad: Minerals, Oil, and AI
The selection of these three pillars is far from arbitrary. Critical mineral scarcity, oil supply dynamics, and AI capabilities represent the bleeding edge of both economic competitiveness and national security. Together, they form a mutual interdependency that no advanced economy can ignore. Lithium powers batteries that store solar and wind energy. Oil remains indispensable for transportation and petrochemicals. And AI, while software-defined, demands powerful hardware—enabled by rare earths, copper, and semiconductors. Each component increasingly dictates not just industrial output but geopolitical leverage.
Critical Minerals: From Scarcity to Weaponization
According to the December 2025 White House declaration, 17 critical minerals were re-prioritized for accelerated domestic extraction under the Defense Production Act. This follows a March 2025 announcement from the U.S. Geological Survey noting that over 80% of U.S. rare earth imports originate from China—a structural risk exacerbated by growing export controls from Beijing. To mitigate this dependence, public-private partnerships are scaling operations in Wyoming for lithium extraction and restarting processing plants in Texas and California.
Global demand for lithium, cobalt, and nickel is increasing at historic rates. The International Energy Agency projected in February 2025 that global lithium demand will quadruple by 2030—accelerating bottlenecks and price volatility (IEA, 2025). With announcements in late 2025 confirming pricing pacts between Chinese EV battery firms and South American miners, the U.S. faces both market and supply access asymmetries.
This emerging contest has already shifted pricing influence. As of January 2025, lithium carbonate prices rebounded to $31,000/metric ton—a 20% surge from November lows, according to Trading Economics. This price action follows new Chinese quotas unveiled in December 2025, triggering speculative hoarding and hedge fund positioning across global markets.
Oil: Still Central in the Energy Transition
While renewables and electrification expand, oil retains a hold on transportation, aviation, defense logistics, and petrochemical production. In a stark departure from pre-2020 energy narratives, U.S. policymakers have re-centered oil security alongside green targets. In December 2025, the Energy Information Administration data showed U.S. oil production hitting a record 13.4 million barrels/day (EIA, 2025)—surpassing 2019’s previous high. This reassertion of energy dominance coincides with efforts to insulate U.S. allies against Middle Eastern and Russian volatility.
Saudi Arabia’s continued reduction of export quotas, affirmed by OPEC+ in December 2025, has contributed to persistent price floors near $87/barrel in early 2026, despite declining Chinese industrial demand. This breakdown between demand fundamentals and price action reflects today’s structurally constrained oil market. Accordingly, the Donroe Doctrine emphasizes “hydrocarbon realism”—recognizing that allies in Asia and Europe remain acutely vulnerable to fossil energy disruptions, especially during military threats or failed diplomacy.
| Region | Top Energy Reliance (2025) | Main Vulnerability |
|---|---|---|
| Europe | Natural Gas (31%) | Russian supply dynamics |
| India | Oil (82%) imports | OPEC+ pricing mechanisms |
| Japan | Oil & LNG (94%) imports | Strait of Hormuz dependency |
This table illustrates how energy dependence exposes U.S. allies to geopolitical shocks—forces the Donroe Doctrine aims to de-risk through coordinated stockpiles, diplomatic shielding, and logistical military partnerships (NATO, Quad, AUKUS).
Artificial Intelligence: Geoeconomic Multiplier
AI forms the final and most abstract pillar of the Donroe Doctrine. Unlike oil or minerals, it is intangible—yet its power lies in its amplifying role across sectors, from cyber command to manufacturing productivity. In strategic terms, AI is a force multiplier. According to Deloitte’s AI Impact Report (January 2025), nations leading in AI R&D are poised to grow GDP 1.8% faster annually by 2027 than laggards.
Nonetheless, AI leadership requires rare earth-dependent infrastructure. Advanced chips produced by TSMC and NVIDIA’s H200 Tensor Cores depend on precise quantities of tantalum, neodymium, and gallium—elements mined and refined almost exclusively outside the West. Efforts by Intel and Micron to establish U.S.-based fabs—accelerated by CHIPS Act expansions in Q4 2025—suggest growing awareness of this vulnerability (U.S. Department of Commerce).
Just as oil logistics shaped 20th-century warfare capabilities, AI’s deployment in battlefield autonomy, synthetic intelligence agents, and intelligence fusion will define deterrence in the 2030s. Russia’s December 2025 test of semi-autonomous drone battalions in the Donbas region—a move confirmed by Defense One—demonstrates this coming shift. Accordingly, AI is both a defensive and offensive domain under the Donroe rubric.
A Weaponized Global Economy: Policy Reactions and Countermoves
Following Washington’s strategic alignment, Beijing, Brussels, and New Delhi have each signaled doctrine-adjacent policies. China expanded its rare earth quotas in late December 2025 to prioritize domestic AI projects under its 2030 “Tech Sovereignty Initiative,” while also reducing CSP-grade silicon exports to foreign chip fabs. The European Commission, in early January 2026, proposed price caps on imported AI-enabled surveillance software, citing both ethical concerns and strategic integrity.
Meanwhile, India’s Ministry of Commerce declared a 42% export tax on high-purity graphite—a critical battery and chip substrate—citing domestic manufacturing needs under “Make in India 2.0.” The policy fallout is clear: the world is slicing along techno-industrial lines. The Donroe Doctrine may catalyze a multipolar, resource-secured order not unlike the Cold War—but with deeper economic interdependencies and supply chain fragilities.
Industry Adjustments and Capital Realignment
The Donroe Doctrine has induced rapid capital realignments across sectors that straddle resource and algorithmic frontiers. Semiconductor heavyweights such as NVIDIA and AMD have aggressively expanded American capacity, with NVIDIA’s latest $9.2 billion Arizona facility—announced in January 2026—projected to anchor 15% of North American GPU production by 2027 (NVIDIA Blog). Simultaneously, Rio Tinto and BHP have increased U.S. upstream mining investments by 23% YoY in Q4 2025, per Mining.com.
Wall Street has responded in parallel. As of January 2026, the iShares Global CleanTech ETF and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF have outperformed the S&P 500 by 7.3% and 6.8%, respectively YTD (MarketWatch), reflecting enthusiasm for decoupled supply chains and strategic materials. Venture capital funding for AI infrastructure startups—focused on model compression and sovereign AI models—rose 38% quarter-on-quarter in Q4 2025 (VentureBeat AI).
Outlook: Decoupling or Redundancy?
Looking toward 2027, a central tension defines the Donroe Doctrine’s next phase: will it produce full-scope decoupling, or a tiered redundancy model where adversarial tolerance coexists with strategic insulation? Decoupling remains cost-intensive, especially for semiconductor and mining verticals that require long-lead capital. Nevertheless, redundancy through alliances—like enhanced U.S.-Australia critical mineral agreements and Japan-U.S. semiconductor cooperatives—offers intermediate resilience.
However, there is an emerging risk of over-correction. If nations overcommit to autarkic ambitions, global R&D synergies may erode. For example, the rise of sovereign large language models (LLMs) in France, Japan, and India could fragment foundational AI innovation—leading to interoperability failures and uneven performance. The Donroe Doctrine, while prudent in its threat assessment, must remain agile enough to avoid techno-economic silos that suppress global innovation.