The U.S. Army War College report frames silver as a secondary but indispensable strategic mineral. It is essential for defense electronics, aerospace, and weapons but was overshadowed in vulnerability discussions by chromium, cobalt, manganese, and PGMs, which were almost entirely imported from unstable regions. Nonetheless, silver’s lack of substitutes and role in critical technologies made its reduction from the National Defense Stockpile a significant security risk in the early 1990s

1. Strategic Minerals vs. Silver

The report’s primary focus is on chromium, cobalt, manganese, and platinum group metals (PGMs) as the most critical strategic minerals for U.S. defense and industry. Silver is not classified in the same top tier in this analysis. However, silver does appear in the broader discussion of critical resources, particularly when the author addresses industrial minerals with no substitutes and the importance of metals for high-tech military systems.

2. Silver’s Role in U.S. National Security

• Industrial and defense uses:
  Silver is identified as an essential mineral due to its electrical and thermal conductivity. It is embedded in weapons systems, communications technology, aerospace, and electronics. The report emphasizes that some minerals, like silver, cannot be substituted effectively in certain applications.
• Dependence on foreign sources:
  By 1993, the U.S. was increasingly reliant on foreign producers for silver supply, though not to the same degree as cobalt, chromium, manganese, and PGMs. Still, the study highlights that import dependence for multiple strategic minerals—including silver—leaves the U.S. vulnerable in case of war or trade disruption.

3. Historical and Strategic Context

World War II & Cold War:
During WWII and the Cold War, silver—like other strategic minerals—was stockpiled and heavily monitored. U.S. policymakers recognized that without adequate silver supply, advanced weapons and industrial production would suffer.
The report links this to broader lessons: just as Germany’s lack of critical minerals limited its military power, the U.S. cannot afford dependency without reserves.

Stockpile importance:
The National Defense Stockpile (NDS) was originally created to hold critical materials—including silver—to ensure wartime readiness. However, by the early 1990s, the Department of Defense was selling off much of the stockpile, reducing protection against a supply cutoff. This included large reductions in silver and other metals.

4. Geographic & Supply Risks

Southern Africa & Former Soviet Union:
The report emphasizes that the most critical minerals are geographically concentrated in politically unstable regions (South Africa, Zaire, Zambia, and the former USSR). While silver was not as geographically monopolized, its supply chain was still vulnerable due to global economic shifts and competition with Europe and Japan for market share.

Secondary producers:
The report mentions that marginal suppliers like New Caledonia, Madagascar, and Yugoslavia were also unstable in the early 1990s, potentially affecting global silver availability as well as other strategic minerals.

5. Policy Recommendations for Silver & Other Strategic Minerals

Stockpile retention:
Retaining the National Defense Stockpile—including its silver holdings—was identified as the single most effective safeguard against disruption.

Exploration & R&D:
The report urges incentives for domestic mining and alternative technologies to reduce reliance on unstable foreign sources.

Substitution limits:
While some metals have partial substitutes, silver is highlighted as extremely difficult to replace in critical defense and electronics functions, making supply security paramount.

6. Key Takeaways About Silver

• Silver is not grouped with the "big four" (chromium, cobalt, manganese, PGMs) but is treated as a critical industrial and defense material.
• The U.S. defense sector depended on silver for electronics, communications, and advanced weapons systems.
• Silver stockpiles were being drawn down in the early 1990s, despite ongoing geopolitical risks.
• Unlike oil, there are no large-scale substitutes for silver in many high-tech applications, so a cutoff would have direct national security consequences.
• The rationale was that future conflicts would be short and technologically decisive, a dangerous assumption the report directly criticizes.