What I found….
No, the Pentagon becoming a stakeholder in a mine is not a form of communism
. While it is a form of government intervention in the economy, communism is a much broader economic and political ideology that seeks to abolish private property and class systems. The Pentagon's investment is instead a targeted intervention for national security purposes within a capitalist framework.
Why the Pentagon's investment is not communism
Not an abolition of private property. In communism, the state or community owns all the "means of production" (factories, mines, etc.). The Pentagon's recent 15% stake in the rare earth mineral miner MP Materials does not change its status as a publicly-traded company. MP Materials remains a private business, with the Pentagon as its largest single shareholder, not its sole owner.
Driven by national security, not ideology. The investment's purpose is to secure a domestic supply of critical minerals for military and technological applications. This action is a form of industrial policy intended to counter China's dominance in the rare earth market and reduce U.S. dependency on foreign sources.
Part of a capitalist system. The Pentagon's move can be categorized as a public-private partnership, a tool used in capitalist economies. The CEO of MP Materials explicitly stated the investment is "not a nationalization" and that the company remains "shareholder driven". This is different from the state control of industry seen in historical communist states.
The US government owns other businesses. The US government already owns and operates a variety of enterprises, known as government corporations or state-owned enterprises, including the U.S. Postal Service and Amtrak. These specific, targeted ownerships for public benefit or strategic interest also do not make the country communist.