I agree with others who ask whywe still discuss the science re the Lynas issue. I think most recognize thatthis issue has assumed a political level that means scientific reason is nolonger useful in trying to predict the Lynas outcome. Whether Lynas is the mosttransparent miner around or not, does not matter. Whether the originalagreements show that the waste should be removed or stored (unless you want toargue this in the Malaysian? or world courts) does not matter. IMO the Malaysianposition is now entirely political (and ego) driven.
Question is, how does Lynasmeet this political issue and assuage certain egos? As investors this is theone present/future question to which we need answer(s). Hence, here are myquestions and, again, non any longer relate to the science involved (unless youwant to call it political science).
Do we believe that theMalaysian economy receives important present economic benefits from havingLynas reside within (i.e., people to Government)?
Will such Lynas residence infact lead to future economic gains?
Do those potential gainsinclude drawing other entities to Malaysian shores because of Lynas presence?
Will such gains includeMalaysia creating its own value chain entities related to Lynas?
Will such new Malaysian entitiesdepend on non-Malaysian finance and if so, will this mean Japanese, rather thanChinese money?
Will external Malaysianinvestments (e.g. Hastings) benefit from governments who look favorably on theway in which Malaysia treats its own internal ‘foreign’ entities?
In contrast, do we believe thatthe Chinese have any say in the outcome for Lynas (e.g., was there anydiscussion of Lynas in the recent transport structure renegotiated by Malaysia)?After all WES committed such discussions re., Lynas future with the MalaysianPM.government backing?
If you believe that most of theabove questions have a positive answer, then that would offer support for Lynascontinuation in Malaysia, from a rationale economic perspective.
However, regardless of theamount of rationality that may be perceived to support Lynas continuation fromthe perspective of Malaysian benefits, IMO the status quo for both parties isgone. If the waste stays, thenMalaysian egos lose and I don’t get the feeling this will occur; not this time.However, if it goes, then where to? If no to Australia will Lynas mentor Japantake? Or another country? This is the major issue. Clearly transportation willcome at a cost (which Japanese financiers would probably support). Anyone have suggestions and reasons here as this for me is now the crux of the matter? Could amajor step in here to alleviate this problem? WES still wanted permit guarantees, but could others carry much greater ‘muscle’ re removal anddisposal? Also, would such moves by others require tacit government backing?
If Malaysia ‘wins’ on removal, thentheir ‘give’ will have to be probably on the next to impossible waste removalin 6 months. If they don’t ‘give’ then they shut Lynas down, at least inMalaysia with all its suggested potential loss. Therefore, a quid pro quo wouldbe a more realistic removal period given with a renewed operation permit.
I would be very interested inany ideas focused on the crux issue; the removal.
GLTAhttps://twitter.com/EarthsRare
(20min delay)