Pentagon Launches Strategic Reserve Assessment for Titanium and Magnesium
Alina Collins
The Defense Logistics Agency issued two requests for information on titanium and magnesium on July 14, formally flagging both metals as potential wartime manufacturing bottlenecks — the U.S. has zero domestic sponge-titanium capacity, and magnesium is a prerequisite for producing titanium and other defense materials.
What exactly is the Pentagon doing?
The Defense Logistics Agency issued two RFIs through the Warstopper Program, asking suppliers for data on usage volumes, annual demand, lead times, and stockpiling methods for titanium and magnesium.
An RFI is not a procurement order — but it signals that Washington now formally treats both metals as materials that could run short in a conflict.
This means → the Pentagon's assessment is explicit: if a war starts, the titanium and magnesium supply chains may not hold.
How bad is the titanium problem?
After the Henderson, Nevada plant closed in 2020, the U.S. has zero domestic sponge-titanium production. Aviation-grade titanium relies entirely on imports from Japan, Saudi Arabia, and Kazakhstan.
Titanium — a metal prized for its extreme strength-to-weight ratio — is used across airframes, engines, munitions, armored vehicles, warships, and hypersonic missiles.
Before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Boeing sourced roughly 80% of its titanium from Russia's VSMPO-AVISMA; Airbus's share was as high as 60%. Diversification since 2022 has only partially reduced this dependency.
China's share of global titanium output has risen from about 40% in 2019 to an estimated 75% in 2025. In plain terms = dominance over the global titanium supply is shifting further toward China.
Why does magnesium matter just as much?
The U.S. Geological Survey classifies magnesium as a critical mineral. Beyond its use in aluminum alloys and steel, magnesium is a necessary input for producing titanium, hafnium, and zirconium — earning it the label "gateway material."
In plain terms = without magnesium, you cannot even make titanium — it is a chokepoint further upstream in the defense supply chain.
The White House has listed processed critical minerals including magnesium as essential inputs for fighter jets, munitions, armor, naval vessels, and communications and navigation systems.
How much money has the U.S. already committed?
Measures already announced include $2 billion injected into the National Defense Stockpile, $5 billion allocated to strengthen critical-mineral supply chains, and a $12 billion strategic reserve initiative from the U.S. Export-Import Bank.
This means → the funding framework is in place, but whether the money actually flows and whether capacity actually gets built are two different questions.
Whether this RFI advances to actual procurement will be a key test of how fast U.S. critical-mineral policy moves from paper to action.
Content is for reference only, not financial advice.