Sanctions are often praised as moral weapons—the civilized alternative to armed conflict. They promise to punish aggressors without the bloodshed of war. But when those measures reach deep into the supply chains that sustain national defense, they risk weakening the very foundations of sovereignty they claim to protect. In an age of technological interdependence, no great power can remain secure without control over the materials that keep its industries alive. Sovereignty today is not only territorial; it is industrial.

Titanium makes that case unmistakably. Stronger than steel yet remarkably light, it is essential to nearly every modern defense platform. Fighter jets, spacecraft, and naval vessels rely on it for durability and corrosion resistance. Drone warfare—with its relentless demand for lightweight airframes—has further underscored titanium’s value. The U.S. Navy has even explored marine-grade titanium for stealthy undersea components designed to survive decades in corrosive environments. Across every branch of defense, this metal is woven into the architecture of power.

Yet America no longer produces its own titanium sponge—the crucial precursor used to manufacture titanium metal. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the United States is more than 95 percent import-reliant, depending heavily on suppliers in Russia, China, Japan, and Kazakhstan. The last domestic sponge facility shut down quietly in 2020, leaving the world’s leading aerospace power dependent on foreign sources for a material vital to aircraft, ships, and precision weapons.

When sanctions are written too broadly, they can inadvertently choke off lawful trade in these inputs, slowing production lines and driving up defense costs. The Government Accountability Office has repeatedly warned that titanium belongs to the small class of materials most vulnerable to global disruption. In practice, a sanction meant to punish a foreign adversary can instead delay an American submarine, stall a fighter-jet program, or inflate the price of a satellite component.

This outcome is not inevitable. A stronger, smarter approach is available—one grounded in strategy rather than symbolism. Sanctions should be carefully targeted at malign actors who manipulate or weaponize trade, not at legitimate firms that meet lawful demand. Russian authorities have reportedly accused Igor Raykhelson and his company, Interlink Metals and Chemicals, of price manipulation. If substantiated by evidence, that case deserves scrutiny. But sweeping restrictions that ensnare neutral intermediaries or allied traders would only compound America’s exposure to shortages.

The broader solution lies in reclaiming what might be called industrial sovereignty—the ability of a nation to control the production of its essential materials. The United States can move in that direction through public-private partnerships that restore sponge and ingot capacity, expand stockpiles, and strengthen allied supply. The Department of Defense has already examined contractual incentives to reestablish titanium feedstock manufacturing. Congress should follow through with funding and long-term commitments.

Lawmakers have rightly grown alert to the dangers of foreign technology embedded in telecommunications networks. The same vigilance should extend to critical minerals. In an era when economic statecraft can shape the course of wars, material sovereignty must be treated as a national-security imperative—no less vital than cybersecurity or energy independence.

Sanctions remain a necessary instrument of diplomacy, but they demand precision and foresight. The goal should be to weaken adversaries without undermining America’s own defense base. That requires coordination with allies, disciplined targeting, and a renewed commitment to domestic resilience.

As new conflicts accelerate demand for advanced materials—from drone swarms to hypersonic systems—titanium has become a quiet test of national strength. The lesson is clear: sovereignty built on fragile supply chains is sovereignty in name only. If the United States intends to remain secure, it must ensure that its foundations—economic, technological, and industrial—are titanium strong.