Ukraine and US Unable to Conclude Rare Earth Minerals Deal
This past Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and US President Donald Trump convened in Washington with the intention of signing a deal that would allow the US to tap into Ukraine’s rare earth mineral resources. Nevertheless, the session deviated from its intended purpose and concluded with a tense discussion involving Zelensky, Trump, and Vice President JD Vance. After Zelensky’s premature exit, the White House issued a statement confirming that the agreement remained unsigned.
Prior to the meeting, Zelensky had shown optimism, suggesting this “initial” agreement might lead to expanded collaboration. However, he acknowledged that Ukraine still needed to obtain security assurances from the US, which was a major point for him. Trump contended that the agreement could enable American taxpayers to “recover their funds” from the assistance given to Ukraine during the conflict, but emphasized that European nations should primarily handle Kyiv’s security needs.
What Conditions Are in the Agreement?
On Wednesday, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal announced that Kyiv and Washington had finalized a draft of the agreement, which was released on Friday morning. The deal outlined the creation of an “investment fund” to support Ukraine’s reconstruction efforts.
Shmyhal noted that the fund would be jointly managed by both countries on an “equal footing.” As per the agreement, Ukraine would contribute 50% of its future income from state-controlled mineral resources, oil, and gas to the fund. These funds would then be put toward projects focused on improving Ukraine’s security, stability, and economic development.
The US, for its part, committed to a sustained financial investment aimed at fostering stability and prosperity in Ukraine, in line with US law. The agreement also specified that the US would hold the largest share of the fund allowed by American rules.
Disagreements Over Mineral Rights and Financial Terms
Tensions between Trump and Zelensky appear to have escalated over the specific terms of the minerals deal. Initially, the US sought a $500 billion claim on Ukraine’s mineral wealth, a demand that Zelensky rejected. Reports indicate that this request was later withdrawn.
According to Tymofiy Mylovanov, a former Ukrainian minister and head of the Kyiv School of Economics, Washington initially proposed an arrangement that undermined Ukraine’s sovereignty and would have led to economic collapse. However, he noted that the US has since revised its approach, now offering a more balanced deal based on co-ownership, without direct claims on past aid. This, he argued, could ultimately benefit Ukraine.
Trump has highlighted the financial perspective, claiming on Tuesday that the US has given Ukraine roughly $300 billion to $350 billion in aid and that a minerals agreement could help recoup this expenditure. Conversely, the Kiel Institute, a German research organization, estimates that the real US support totals $119 billion.
Does the Agreement Include Security Guarantees?
A key issue for Zelensky has been obtaining clear security assurances from the US. On Wednesday, he affirmed that no such assurances had been secured.
“I sought a clause concerning security guarantees for Ukraine as it is vital,” Zelensky remarked.
When questioned about possibly abandoning the agreement without security assurances, he replied: “I aim for a NATO pathway or something comparable. Without security guarantees, there will be no ceasefire, and nothing will operate.”
Despite the lack of direct security commitments, the agreement includes language indicating US support for Ukraine’s pursuit of security guarantees to achieve lasting peace.
Zelensky insisted that Ukraine would not complete the agreement until he and Trump arrived at a consensus regarding security assurances and figured out how to incorporate them into the initial deal. On the other hand, Trump minimized the notion of direct US security guarantees, asserting that Europe should now assume those duties. He further mentioned that having American workers in Ukraine would provide “automatic security.”
The concept of a minerals agreement was originally introduced by Zelensky as a means to provide the US with a tangible incentive to continue supporting Ukraine. Trump has suggested that, in exchange for mineral access, Ukraine would secure the “right to continue fighting” and that the US would keep supplying military equipment and ammunition “until a deal with Russia is reached.”
The US president has also claimed that Russia is open to allowing European peacekeepers in Ukraine. However, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has dismissed this possibility.
When Will the Agreement Be Signed?
Trump initially mentioned that the agreement would be finalized at the White House meeting on Friday. Although Ukrainian Prime Minister Shmyhal affirmed that a definitive version of the deal was ready, Zelensky’s adviser, Mykhaylo Podolyak, explained that only a framework agreement was intended for signing.
However, no agreement was signed. Instead, the meeting escalated into a confrontation between Trump and Zelensky in the Oval Office. At one point, an angry Trump accused Zelensky of being insufficiently grateful for US assistance and warned that he was “gambling with World War Three.”
“You need to finalize a deal, or we’re done,” Trump allegedly told Zelensky. “You lack leverage.”
Zelensky, in response, insisted that there could be “no compromises” with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Trump later shared on Truth Social, accusing Zelensky of having “disrespected the US in its esteemed Oval Office” and declaring: “He can return when he is prepared for peace.”
Currently, it remains uncertain whether the agreement will be signed or when it might occur.
Ukraine’s Mineral Wealth
Kyiv estimates that Ukraine possesses about 5% of the world’s “essential raw materials.” This encompasses roughly 19 million metric tons of verified graphite deposits, ranking Ukraine among the top five suppliers globally of this mineral, which is vital for manufacturing electric vehicle batteries.
Moreover, Ukraine boasts considerable deposits of titanium and lithium. The nation also asserts it possesses large reserves of rare earth elements—17 minerals vital for military tech, wind turbines, and electronic devices—although the precise extent of these reserves is contested by some experts.
Adding to the complexity, certain mineral-abundant regions of Ukraine are presently under Russian control. Economy Minister Yulia Svyrydenko has indicated that mineral deposits with an estimated value of $350 billion are situated in areas occupied by Russia.
A further challenge to mineral extraction is the extensive presence of unexploded landmines. Experts estimate that approximately 25% of Ukraine’s terrain is affected, especially in the conflict-ravaged eastern areas.
There is also the issue of time. Even if the agreement is finalized, it could take years before the extraction and export of these resources yield tangible economic benefits.
“These resources are not stored in a warehouse ready for dispatch—they need to be developed,” explained Mylovanov. “Should the US invest, it could eventually prove advantageous for everyone involved.”
What Has Been Russia’s Response?
Russian President Vladimir Putin has yet to comment on the reported details of the US-Ukraine deal. However, on Monday, he told Russian state television that Moscow is prepared to “offer” mineral resources to American companies for joint ventures, including mining in Russia’s “new territories”—a reference to occupied areas of eastern Ukraine.
Putin downplayed the potential US-Ukraine agreement as inconsequential, asserting that Russia “certainly possesses, I want to stress, far more of these resources than Ukraine.”
“As for the new territories, we are ready to attract foreign partners to develop these regions, which have returned to the Russian Federation,” he added.
Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov suggested on Tuesday that the situation remains fluid: “Whether [Ukraine and the US] will sign this agreement or something else, we’ll see. There have been no official statements on this matter yet.”
