A proposed merger between mining giants Rio Tinto and Glencore could face significant regulatory resistance from China, with analysts warning that Beijing may demand major asset divestments before approving any deal that would reshape global commodity markets.
The companies disclosed last week that they are once again exploring a potential tie-up, a move that could create the world’s largest mining group with a market valuation exceeding $200 billion. While discussions remain at an early stage, industry observers say the scale of both firms’ exposure to China makes regulatory approval from Beijing unavoidable.
China is the world’s largest buyer of industrial metals, and regulators have historically intervened in major mining transactions when resource security or market concentration is perceived to be at risk. Legal and market analysts say copper production and iron ore marketing would likely sit at the center of Beijing’s concerns should a merger move forward.
A combined Rio Tinto–Glencore entity would command a meaningful share of global copper supply and wield substantial influence over pricing and distribution. That concentration, analysts say, could trigger demands for asset sales designed to dilute market power while strengthening China’s access to strategic resources.
Such an approach would not be unprecedented. In 2013, Chinese regulators forced Glencore to divest its stake in Peru’s Las Bambas copper mine as a condition for approving its takeover of Xstrata. That transaction also came with supply commitments aimed at limiting pricing influence over copper concentrate.
The geopolitical environment surrounding copper has only intensified since then. The metal has become central to renewable energy infrastructure, electric vehicles, and artificial intelligence hardware, elevating its importance well beyond traditional industrial use.
Rio Tinto, meanwhile, had already been exploring asset-for-equity transactions with China’s state-owned Chinalco, its largest shareholder, before merger talks with Glencore became public. Assets in Africa, Guinea, and Mongolia have previously been viewed as potential candidates in negotiations involving Chinese partners.
Analysts say African mining assets could once again become leverage points, particularly as several Latin American governments have grown more resistant to Chinese ownership in critical mineral sectors.
Political considerations may further complicate the picture. U.S. officials have increasingly framed China’s influence over mineral supply chains as a national security concern, raising questions about how Washington would respond if high-value mining assets were transferred to Chinese entities as part of a regulatory compromise.
Previous high-profile deals illustrate the stakes. China’s refusal to approve Qualcomm’s acquisition of NXP Semiconductors and Nvidia’s attempted takeover of Arm both ultimately killed transactions that had cleared regulatory hurdles elsewhere.
Still, history suggests China may prefer negotiation over outright rejection. In several past cases, Beijing has approved complex deals after extracting concessions that aligned with its strategic and economic priorities.
Market participants caution that any Rio Tinto–Glencore combination would face a prolonged and politically sensitive approval process, with China positioned as the decisive power broker.
Whether the companies are willing to part with prized assets to secure approval remains an open question, one that could determine the fate of what would be one of the most consequential mining mergers in history.
