February 27, 2025 - 3:30pm
Washington and Kyiv indicated this week that they’ve reached a deal on giving the United States a stake in Ukraine’s mineral wealth. It is expected that Presidents Trump and Zelensky might formalise the agreement as early as Friday.
While Trump has framed the agreement as compensation for US aid to Ukraine over the course of its war with Russia, Zelensky initially pitched the deal as a sweetener for continued American commitment to Ukraine. Indeed, the draft of the agreement includes a clause, insisted on by Kyiv, that the US “supports Ukraine’s effort to obtain security guarantees needed to establish lasting peace,” but includes no specific security guarantees from Washington.
While Trump sounds like he’s trying to strip Ukraine for parts, Zelensky seems to think he’s getting a future US commitment to Ukraine’s security. So who’s playing whom?
The Ukraine deal shows the problem with Trump’s tendency to view the United States’ international role in mercenary terms. While Washington hasn’t committed to anything yet, it’s possible that the US stake in Ukraine’s natural resources could serve as a backdoor for US security guarantees to Ukraine in the future.
This would be a very bad deal for the United States, perpetuating its entanglement in Ukraine amid simmering tensions with Russia while obstructing burden-shifting to Europe. In exchange, Washington is unlikely to even gain much in revenue, let alone in strategic significance, given the evidence that Ukraine’s supposed mineral wealth and rare earth reserves, hyped up by Kyiv for Trump’s benefit, are in fact vastly overstated.
While Trump said Wednesday that “I’m not going to make security guarantees,” there is a precedent for reversing his own instinct for military retrenchment when financial interests are at stake. For example, when Trump promised during his first term to withdraw US forces from Syria, they ultimately stayed only due to, in Trump’s words, “the oil,” and remain there today despite the second Trump administration’s future plans to withdraw them.
The President’s mercenary approach also complicates his administration’s desire to turn over responsibility for European security to Brussels. Trump has often called upon European leaders to spend more on defence, framing this as a form of payment to the United States for continued protection. But the United States should be scaling back its security commitment to Europe, not getting paid more to stay. US-imposed defence spending targets for Europe, like the 5% of GDP demanded by Trump, are both arbitrary and contrary to America’s military disengagement; a strategically autonomous Europe can and should be left to figure out how much to spend to deter Russia on its own.
Visits to the White House this week by European leaders show the results of this approach. Even as French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer try to show they are getting serious about defence, they are still trying to lobby Trump for a US commitment to Ukraine. Starmer is expected to use the announcement of more defence spending as a means of convincing Trump to back the UK plan to send European troops as “peacekeepers” to Ukraine. While ruling out a US security guarantee on Wednesday, Trump nevertheless expressed approval for European troops being sent to Ukraine, which the Russians have already stated is unacceptable.
Moreover, following his recent visit to the White House, Macron said of the Ukraine mineral deal that it was “one of the best ways to have a US commitment to Ukrainian sovereignty,” while insisting that a peace deal include security guarantees. Members of Trump’s circle have expressed similar sentiments. Mike Waltz, Trump’s national security advisor, said that the mineral deal was “the best security guarantee [Ukraine] could ever hope for, much more than another pallet of ammunition.” Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the staunchest hawks in Washington, may well have planted the idea in Trump’s mind when he stated last year that the United States had an interest in Ukraine’s natural resources, framing it as a reason to continue US support for Ukraine in the war.
Trump has an opportunity to end the Ukraine war and shift Europe’s defence burden back to the continent. But the mineral deal puts Trump at risk of being played and the US at risk of remaining entangled in Ukraine’s security.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThis is silly. To end the war, the US must provide security guarantees for Ukraine, and ongoing arms supply. Otherwise it’s just a truce until the next Russian attack. Trump knows this.
There has been peace in Korea for 70 years b/c of US guarantees. There was peace in Europe for 40 years b/c of US guarantees. That’s what the future looks like for Ukraine. At least until the Russian regime falls apart. Then maybe Ukraine can reunite, like East and West Germany.
The only alternative to US guarantees is for Ukraine to acquire nuclear weapons, which they will certainly do if guarantees are not forthcoming.
They had nuclear weapons but traded them in for security guarantees!
A lot of good that turned out to be
That’s why there are going to be European troops to police the ceasefire line. That’s the trip-wire.
Russia won’t agree to European troops as -“peacekeepers”…and you presume the USA will be backing those troops. It won’t.
Oh I think you’ll find otherwise. Russia won’t have a veto either. And besides Putin doesn’t want a deal anyway. He needs perpetual War or his position becomes more vulnerable.
His war economy can’t go on indefinitely too. He can’t even service his Tanks.
Ukraine didn’t have nuclear weapons. It had Soviet nuclear weapons on its territory which it couldn’t use because it didn’t have the relevant knowledge to use them.
The UK has nuclear weapons but there is no way they can be used without the consent…practical and authorisation, of the USA.
Wrong. UK deterrent does not need US authorisation and does not rely on US guidance systems.
When we need to replace Warheads it is the case the stockpile is in the US, but each Vanguard Trident has 192 warheads. That’s all of Russia’s major cities and military bases. And based on only one Bomber being at sea.
Now of course the scenario where we launch without close coordination with US currently unthinkable, (as almost is the concept of Nuclear war per se) but the deterrent is independent and UK been insistent on that since Bevin.
Nuclear weapons are a 1950’s technology. Ukraine had a large % of the USSR’s military-industrial complex. To think they couldn’t make the nukes work is just silliness.
I’d love to know what people are down-voting me for? Do you not want peace in Ukraine? Territorial concessions by Ukraine + European peace keepers on the DMZ with a US back-stop is the obvious answer.
Putin gets his land. Ukraine gets security, and they’ll be no 3rd act to Russian aggression. What is there to object to? Unless you actual want another forever war, or a Russian victory.
I’m not a downvoter (or up) but there are a lot of people on here that believe, or act like they believe, the Ukraine war is a neocon plot and/or caused by NATO expansion, as though Russia has no agency or ambitions of its own.
To them, I guess the war ends when Putin is allowed to have what he wants, because then he’ll just go into the woods and have a few drinks and sing happy songs round a campfire with his buddies.
Wait, Donald Trump got suckered into making a terrible deal?!?!? How could this possibly happen? If only there had been some sign from the past that he’s a absolutely horrible businessman who wouldn’t know a good deal if it slapped him in his stupid orange face!
You know who was great at deals? John Biden. Cutting off communication with Moscow and giving mixed signals to Israel was a stroke of bold genius that brought immense peace to the world. Energetic and strong leaders like John Biden only come around so often. We were fortunate to have witnessed his strong leadership.
He gave us so many great lines that will be quoted throughout the ages. In 500 years the people will remember his majestic strength and negotiating prowess.
You’re no Oscar Wilde, are you?!?!
(I’ll wait why you go and look up the reference)
I’m not sure what Joe Biden has to do with Trump’s pathetic groveling to Putin. Is that Joe Biden’s fault too?
It doesn’t seem that long ago that American conservatives, if such a thing still actually exists, would have been mortified to see their president appease the Russians and parrot their talking points. Not any more it seems.
Ah “Pathetic groveling.” Remind me of all the territory Putin took while Trump was in office?
Putin completely rolled Obama and the people that controlled Biden. These clowns were throwing money into the abyss. The US taxpayer has bankrolled the European social welfare system long enough. That ends now. Time for the nations of Europe to pay their defense bills like big boy countries!
Its Trump that wants to sign that territory away to his boss in Moscow.
His boss. Yeah OK. His boss from the ELEVENTH biggest economy in the world. That makes sense.
Did you say anything when Crimea was taken under Obama or was that irrelevant to your territorial argument?
Then explain why Trump is spouting all of Putin’s talking points, about to sell Ukraine down the river to Russia, and is telling the world that he can trust Putin. Its embarrassing.
And I suppose you are embarrassed which is why you keep trying to change the subject instead of answering the question.
I know you won’t even try because its too humiliating for you and for the entire USA. Go on, prove me wrong – if you have the guts…
I disagree with your entire approach that starting a debate or negotiation with insults achieves results. You want a leader to performatively scold Putin even though you know he’s not listening. Progressives relentlessly go to the well of moral scolding. Even if you have the moral high-ground, scolding your opponent isn’t going to persuade them.
It also produces ridiculous bias. You’re just jumping at every headline before you have all the information. There’s no human being on earth able to consistently get things right by instantly jumping to conclusions.
“I disagree with your entire approach that starting a debate or negotiation with insults achieves results. ”
You do realize that we are talking about Donald Trump here, don’t you?
The facts are indisputable. Trump immediately gave Putin everything he wanted – there was no negotiation, only complete debasement and appeasement.
Americans should be utterly ashamed by this episode. You know that but you can’t ever admit that your orange buffoon god has got it wrong, can you?
His behavior this morning with Zelensky, plus that of his chubby sock puppet Vance, only confirms exactly what I am saying.
It also confirmed that he doesn’t know what rare earth minerals are and that he thinks they are raw earth minerals. This is the moron that you worship like a god.
How did Trump give Putin everything he wants? He’s given him exactly nothing so far. Trump has zero authority to bind Ukraine to a peace deal. It’s 100% up to Ukraine to decide what they want to do.
This War would have concluded years ago if America didn’t have an empty suit in the White House for the past 4 years. We effectively operated without a President.
Make up your mind, dimwit. Either the US president can end the war or he can’t – which is it?
You must have been very proud watching that insane performance by Trump today. Yelling at Zelensky like a deranged maniac and killing a peace deal because he didn’t get enough thanks. My god.
That’s an obvious False Choice question. You know good and well that the best a President can do is INFLUENCE peace or War outside our borders.
Biden chose to promote War through “Tough Talk” when he knew Ukraine didn’t have enough soldiers to compete long term. The entire world is now talking about Peace not War because of Trump. If Harris had won, we’d still be throwing money into the abyss.
If your friend or “ally” is doing something destructive you aren’t helping them by encouraging them to continue destroying themselves. Its like giving heroin addicts “safe injection sites.” The only way the War ends is by acknowledging reality that Ukraine doesn’t have enough soldiers to continue indefinitely.
“Signing away” is silly. Europe star diplomat Josep Borrell said at the beginning of the internationalisation of the conflict that the decision would fall on the battlefield. So that is now happening. Russia has conquered the territory, end of story. Reversing that would take military means, which no-one opposite Russia has.
I honestly don’t understand these mineral rights deal. Ukraine is a sovereign nation. It can set whatever royalty payments it chooses. And if US companies don’t see any profitable way to extract those resources, they simply go somewhere else. What am I missing?
The United States considers those rare earth metals to be an essential strategic resource in an era where conflict with China is a real possibility and they have already gained control over a vast portion of the world’s rare earth metals. It’s cold blooded strategic realism.
So the US can just go in there, extract the resources and pay whatever they like? Or not pay any royalties? Are these deals meant to set the royalty rates? I get the US exerting pressure not to allow in Chinese companies, but what about Australian or Canadian companies?
You’re not missing anything, but you might be experiencing a moment of cognitive dissonance— just an observation. The difficulty lies in reconciling the fact that the U.S. and the EU have always operated through extortion, yet now you are witnessing it unfold in real time.
America has never held inherent power; its dominance has always relied on purchasing influence—whether by legally ensnaring countries in binding agreements (NATO) or by extracting resources through war (too long to count). Without these mechanisms, its global leverage would not exist.
In Ukraine’s case, its sovereignty and autonomy are being eroded for the next 15 to 25 years, effectively turning it into a resource hub for American interests. However, this strategy may not hold in the long run, given that a substantial portion of Ukraine’s population speaks Russian and has cultural and historical ties to Russia.
I wouldn’t be surprised if, after Trump, Ukraine renegotiates directly with Russia to restore peace and annul exploitative contracts. This could explain why Putin remains unfazed—he may be allowing the West to believe they are in control while waiting for the geopolitical landscape to shift in his favor. After all, Russia is a long-term strategist, unlike the U.S., which tends to operate impulsively. A 10- or even 25-year timeline between countries is hardly long-term, especially when agreements are forged in bad faith with no reciprocal exchange of wealth.
When the Ukrainian population eventually emerges from the trauma inflicted upon them as part of this geopolitical game, they will reclaim their agency through rigorous policymaking. For now, they are little more than a carcass being devoured by the U.S. and the EU, while Russia patiently waits for its turn to take a bite. Zelensky is selling them out!
You may not realise this, but Ukraine has had over twenty years where they could negotiate directly with Russia to keep the peace and make economic deals. They were not interested, to the point where they preferred to have a popular uprising (EuroMaidan), nine years of low-intensity war, the loss of a major part of the country, and three years of high-intensity war – all to avoid making that deal with Russia. The chance that Ukraine would embrace Putin to get rid of the US seems rather remote.
A popular uprising? Yes…of course it was!
It’s even more popular now. A Country doesn’t fight like Ukraine MC without strong support. You need on a trip there and see the resolve and why they never want to be under the Russian yoke again.
Today’s development leaves Ukrainians petrified. Zelensky failed them and the whole world saw it happen.
But Zelensky was elected precisely BECAUSE he promised peace with Russia. And he got to work on a deal with Russia right away too. It was NATO that went in and pressured Zelensky to drop those talks
I wonder whether Zelensky, and indeed Trump for that matter, aren’t being quite clever here. If Trump’s got skin in the game, then he’s not going to want Putin to grab it, so any parts of Ukraine that sit on any of this supposed mineral wealth are per se going to be protected by the US. And Trump is signaling ahead of negotiations with Putin that he’s not going to get anymore of Ukraine without colliding head on with the US, and doing so without Trump having to make explicit military commitments that would play badly with his public at home. Sure, it’s protection money, but it’s protection for the party that needs it ,and money for the party that wants it. What they call a win-win.
I suspect thats precisely the point and is in line with Trumps transactional approach to everything.He is mightily annoyed about the amount of aid given to Ukraine by the USA and as far as he sees it,unsecured whilst EU aidis somehow secured(not sure about the validity of this-Macron told him he was wrong?Its irrelevant as thats what he believes and to misquote “it’s Trumps world and we just live in it”).He wants to broker a peace but also withdraw open ended USA support for Ukraine/Nato.
Taken at face value its a win/win-he gets “security” for USA aid and any continuing aid can be justified on the basis of the mineral rights,he starts to adress a key issue ie security of rare minerals and plants a big fat stars and stripes in the middle of Ukraine.
The joker in the pack is obviously Putins approach to this hence Trumps seemingl willingness to accede to a number of Putins demands (which have always been Nato and territory).
It could be a masterstroke-but then again a complete disaster-but at least the wheels are turning and theer might be a peace deal which stops the wholesale slaughter and mutilation of young men on both sides.Can you picture Kamala putting anything like this in motion?
As Matt points out, China controls a lot of mineral resources. It’s all fine at the moment whilst they are happy to sell them, but if that changes the US and the rest of us could find ourselves with a major problem.
Trump appears obsessed with minerals since he got back to power – Greenland, Canada, the Arctic, Ukraine and even Russia. He’s likely right to be obsessed.
I think the idea is not so much what the US will get out of it as the fact that it’s a door that has been closed to China. Trump views China as the real competition – not Russia. Making noisy threats about Greenland, Canada and Panama are all China-proofing strategies as well.
A reasonable point…China is the real competition. Ukraine and Europe are viewed as an unnecessary distraction.
Originally Donald Trump insisted that Ukraine pay to the US the first $500 billion it got from mineral rights deals with anyone. Volodymyr Zelensky quite rightly objected to that and the new watered-down deal does not include that provision. As far as I can tell, the new mineral rights deal that both parties will sign tomorrow is so watered down that it is all water and no whiskey.
In my experience negotiations are always like this. The parties disagree on certain points and argue about those in detail while the important issues that should be the focus get less attention. Still, somehow the parties drift toward a reasonable agreement in spite of that (or maybe because of that).
It’s not hard to guess where the parties will end up in Ukraine. Russia will keep Crimea and the other territory it possesses now will probably be Russia’s but it may become sort of a buffer zone. Ukraine does not join NATO but retains its army and gets some joint defense agreement. That’s about the size of it.
And that’s all that needs to be agreed now. All the rest will be worked out in the future no matter what agreement is negotiated and signed. That’s what always happens in negotiations.
I remember early in my career as a lawyer negotiating a 120-page agreement filled with clauses we had spent months fighting over. Over $100 million was to be paid (back then that was real money.) Two years later my client was doing a new securities offering and contacted me for a copy of the final agreement. I asked them what happened to their copy and they said they never got one. The whole time they had been going off of a one-page term sheet I had prepared for them fairly early in the negotiation.
I looked into and found out I didn’t have a signed copy of the final agreement in my files either. So I contacted the other side and found out the agreement had never actually been signed and they had just been going off my term sheet as well. We finally found what appeared to be a final copy of the agreement and had the agreement signed and backdated. But I’m pretty sure that just went into a filing cabinet and was never referred to by anyone.
That happens in government too. Back in 2008 outgoing president George W. Bush put together a Troubled Asset Relief Program to distribute $700 billion to banks and other companies to combat the financial crisis then raging. That program was based on a three-page memo the Treasury Department sent to Congress. Although Congress quickly passed a 451-page law that was supposed to govern how the funds were passed out, the Treasury Department (I was told) just went by its own memo and ignored the law.
And Japanese companies at least used to do deals largely on the basis of a term sheet and a handshake (or the Japanese equivalent). Who needs a detailed agreement if you are just going to work out problems as they arise based on the facts as they are then.
So in my view none of this back and forth so far is substantive. It won’t matter at all. But it’s good to see both the Russians and Ukrainians heavily involved in talking when during the three years past no one did any talking after the Istanbul deal fell apart. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris ought to be ashamed of themselves for their neglect. Some sort of deal will come out of this, and what that deal is is not going to matter as much as that the dying will stop.
That it’s not really about the minerals JV.
Biden supplied arms to Ukraine as a loan and expected to be reimbursed. Trump is suggesting how that can be done and in the process is offering a kind of US guarantee of Ukraine insofar as if the US has those mineral rights it will defend them and so the Ukraine.
How much of the importance of these minerals are because of Net Zero ? Undertake sensible measures to reduce energy consumption( insulate homes and offices, toughen up and turn down the temperature ) and reduce minerals, use coal, oil and gas where best, construct decent public transport in towns and cities and CO2 will decline without needing electric cars and wind turbines which require rare elements.
Who cares what Russia thinks? Russia is impoverished and weak and in no state to demand anything.
Russia holds 20% of Ukraine’s territory. That’s a pretty valuable bargaining chip.
Well, then Ukraine’s tanks should be pulling into Moscow’s Red Square any day now.
This is all theatre for Trump and the mugs who believe a word he says. It matters not a jot what this “deal” says – Trump has never kept to a deal in his life and he certainly isn’t about to start now when he has an opportunity to give Putin exactly what he wants. At least what he wants for now…
The bigger question that nobody seems able to answer is why US conservatives are now all about supporting Russia over your longstanding allies. Did Tucker really convince you all with his little jaunt to to Moscow a year or two ago?
Or is the Trump cult so strong that you will do literally whatever he says? Ignorance is strength and all that…
Resident C0 MM ie’s shared insights never amount to anything beyond the bizarre absurdity of an arranged marriage between the “Skinner” and “Is This a Pigeon” memes.
That could have be been written by the FSB.
Trump’s grasping US is weakened by appeasing Putin and walking away from Ukraine. The mineral deal just cover for a partial volte face? The adults in the White House been working an angle for sure.
Now Europe got to front-up more too.
I’ve read the text of the “deal” and it’s bizarre. So far as I can see, all the money that goes into the Fund is re-invested in projects in the Ukraine. There is no provision that mentions distribution of profits to the “owners” of the Fund – the owners being the governments of Ukraine and the US, percentages unspecified.
Anyway, it’s an agreement to agree, nothing is nailed down.
China dominates rare earths not because these deposits are rare but because they have the lowest environmental standards, hence their product is cheapest.
War and conflict is based on resources. Trump is simply getting to the heart of the problem.
The war in the Donbas is over hydrocarbons. Russian separatists wanted them for themselves, the Azov Brigade wanted them for Ukraine.
The minerals deal is simply defusing the conflict and replacing conflict with commercial interests.
This resource approach is about as honest as you can get. Meanwhile, all European elites can talk about is values as a cover for resources.
Maybe the difference in framing is because “fighting over resources” might be seen as uncouth and animalistic whereas “fighting over values” might be seen as sophisticated and humanistic.
#humanimal
Maybe you would like to explain to us what Trump’s utterly insane White House performance today had to do with any of that? How did that get to the heart of the problem?
I hope all the MAGA cult members are feeling happy today after their god-king’s complete unravelling at the Zelensky meeting.
Or, like any sane person should be, you are utterly embarrassed about the humiliation this man is, not just to the United States but to the entire world.
He doesn’t even know what rare earth minerals are – he thinks they are raw earth minerals. You couldn’t make it up…
It wasn’t an unravelling. For whatever reasons that looked like a set-up. Deeply disturbing to watch.
The deal fell apart in spectacular fashion today. Zelensky insisted on continued US military backing in exchange for the mineral rights. Trump said “no deal” and sent Zelensky packing. It was dramatic.
So that’s that. Ukraine will have to soldier on without U. S. Support.
The U. S. came out ahead today. They will no longer pay for Joe Biden’s mistakes. And they can and will make peace with Russia.
it is worth listening to this to get a perspective on the USA, Ukraine and Europe…. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA9qmOIUYJA
It’s all about the mineral rights. Thought of the day
Zelenskyy should put a suit on and get back there if he wants to keep fighting….
• Tesla desperately needs lithium and graphite for its EV batteries.
• Musk has shown willingness to deal directly with mining countries rather than relying on corporate middlemen.
• If Ukraine positioned itself as a direct supplier, Musk could be a powerful economic ally.
What Ukraine Could Offer Musk:
1. Exclusive long-term lithium supply deal (bypassing Western corporations).
2. Tax-free access to Ukrainian battery-grade graphite.
3. Partnership on a Tesla battery factory in Ukraine (similar to Tesla’s China Gigafactory).
Why Musk Might Be Interested:
• It would reduce Tesla’s reliance on China.
• Ukraine’s low-cost labor and energy could make battery production cheaper than in the EU or U.S..
• Musk has political influence in the U.S., which could help Ukraine secure better trade deals.
Ukraine would be a big prize for Russia and the US but ultimately the US will give up its ambitions to extend its empire to (or close to) any part of the old Soviet Union. I doubt if the mineral deal will ever amount to anything.