Recent geopolitical actions regarding the supply of critical minerals have highlighted both the threats posed by countries dominating a critical mineral supply chain, and the potential mitigations served by alternative supplier countries. However, no systematic quantification exists for the intranational factors that determine such threats or mitigations. This study outlines a methodological framework for quantifying the intranational risk profile of critical mineral sectors and compares them with the sector's international potential for leverage. The four intranational factors of concentration, synchronization, private sector involvement, and regulatory obstacles were analyzed across multiple scales in order to determine an intranational risk score that quantifies the resilience or fragility of the critical mineral sector in question. Network analysis was also separately conducted to identify the most important entities operating across all critical mineral sectors. Finally, this study assessed the critical mineral sector's global share of reserves and production to determine an international risk score that quantifies the country's critical mineral sector's leverage potential. A case study of India showed that two critical mineral sectors with high leverage potential, chromite and barite, were respectively intranationally resilient and fragile. Of the remaining sectors with minimal leverage, five sectors such as aluminum were intranationally resilient and may serve as viable mitigation options for future critical mineral supply. Three sectors such as titanium were intranationally fragile, but recent regulatory developments may both decrease intranational risk and increase international risk, potentially making them major critical mineral sectors in the future.