Author: Armando Estrella, Ruchi Bhavsar, Mireia Noriega Etxaide, Pernilla Rao

ABSTRACT

The global transition from hydrocarbons to critical minerals is often framed as a paradigm shift in material needs, yet the political logic of intervention remains driven by a consistent variable: Strategic Asset Value (SAV). SAV is operationalized in this study through three quantifiable indicators: (1) a state’s share of global critical mineral reserves, (2) the USD value of extractive exports as a percentage of world supply, and (3) the degree of great-power supply-chain dependency on those resources. This paper argues that the international response to political and humanitarian crises is not determined by the severity of human suffering, but by the strategic indispensability of the resources located within the crisis zone. By employing a Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD), this study contrasts the international responses to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Haiti, two states experiencing equivalent levels of severe institutional collapse and civilian distress. Utilizing quantitative Natural Language Processing (NLP) to analyze a corpus of 26 official UN Security Council Resolutions-13 per case-from 2021 to 2026, this research introduces the Moral-Material Ratio (MMR). The findings reveal a stark divergence in diplomatic framing. The resource-rich DRC is actively “morally securitized” using elevated normative concepts to justify long-term stabilization and supply chain access, yielding a high normative MMR of 1.41. Conversely, the resource-poor Haitian crisis triggers a logic of containment and neglect, dominated by tactical, depoliticized security rhetoric yielding a low material MMR of 0.53. Ultimately, this paper posits that great powers weaponize moral discourse selectively, demonstrating that extreme human suffering, absent strategic material value, is insufficient to trigger comprehensive international engagement.