ABUJA/NEW YORK — Nigeria has made clear that the United States cannot access its mineral resources without Abuja’s explicit terms and consent, as officials push back against perceptions that a newly signed critical minerals framework amounts to a giveaway of national assets.
Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment Dr Jumoke Oduwole stated on Tuesday that Nigeria holds about 26 of the 60 critical minerals the United States is seeking to secure globally. “There’s nothing anybody is going to take away from us without it being on our own terms,” she said while speaking on Arise Television’s Morning Show.
Oduwole emphasised that the Critical Minerals Framework signed last week between Nigeria and the US is a non-binding Memorandum of Understanding focused on intentions rather than legal obligations. “When you sign MOUs, first of all, they are intentions. They are not legally binding,” she said, adding that the government is not relinquishing control of the country’s resources. “We’re not giving anything. We’re not letting go of anything, and we don’t need to be afraid. We don’t need to be reactive.”
The framework was signed on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York by Nigeria’s Minister of Solid Minerals Development Dr Dele Alake and US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau. It covers cooperation on geological data and exploration, mineral development and processing, infrastructure, and technical capacity building. Nigerian officials describe it as a government-to-government foundation intended to facilitate business-to-business investment and partnerships.
Nigeria estimates the undeveloped value of its solid minerals sector at approximately $700 billion. The country possesses deposits including lithium, gold, tin, iron ore, phosphate, and others relevant to electric vehicle batteries, renewable energy, and advanced technologies. Officials have repeatedly stressed that the goal is to move beyond raw material exports toward local processing, value addition, job creation, and technology transfer.
Alake has said Nigeria “cannot remain a source of raw materials while others capture most of the value,” and that the partnership should deliver quality jobs, stronger skills, and opportunities for Nigerian businesses. Landau described the agreement as a signal that the United States and Nigeria are partners, noting increased bilateral cooperation under the current administrations and affirming support for Nigeria’s desire to capture more of the value chain.
The framework comes as Nigeria seeks to diversify its economy away from oil and gas dependence. It does not commit specific investment amounts, name particular projects, or set binding timelines. Implementation will depend on identifying viable projects and attracting private capital in the coming months.
Some Nigerian voices, including figures linked to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, have called for full public disclosure of the agreement and greater National Assembly scrutiny, arguing that the $700 billion figure reflects estimated resource value rather than US investment and that transparency is essential to protect national interests. Government officials and industry experts have countered that the pact is designed to attract investment and technology, not to sell off resources.
Oduwole also highlighted potential benefits such as jobs for young people in communities affected by insecurity and interest in developing lithium processing and battery manufacturing. Nigeria’s position remains that any engagement on its critical minerals must protect Nigerian businesses and maximise value for the country.
The development reflects broader global competition for secure supplies of critical minerals amid energy transition and technology demands, with African producers increasingly insisting on local value addition rather than pure extraction models.
About the Author
