Arcadiadaily – US-Ukraine relations took center stage last week as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met with US President Donald Trump in Washington to negotiate a crucial minerals agreement. The deal, which would grant the US access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, was expected to mark a new chapter in economic cooperation between the two nations.
However, the highly anticipated agreement was not signed. Zelensky’s abrupt departure after a tense exchange with Trump and Vice President JD Vance signaled deep disagreements. While Zelensky previously hoped that the US-Ukraine deal would lead to further cooperation. He confirmed that it included no security guarantees, despite his active efforts to secure them.
Trump, on the other hand, positioned the deal as a way for US taxpayers to “get their money back” after extensive aid to Ukraine. He also stated that Kyiv’s security should primarily be Europe’s responsibility, further straining negotiations.
On Wednesday, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal announced that Ukraine and the US had finalized a preliminary agreement and made it public on Friday.The deal outlines the establishment of an “investment fund” dedicated to Ukraine’s reconstruction. Managed jointly by Kyiv and Washington on equal terms.
“Cleaner Diesel Engines: Driving a Greener Future”
A key provision of the agreement stipulates that Ukraine will contribute 50% of future proceeds from state-owned mineral resources, oil, and gas to the fund. These funds will then be reinvested to “promote the safety, security, and prosperity of Ukraine.” In return, the US government will, subject to its legal framework, commit to long-term financial support for Ukraine’s economic stability.
The agreement also states that the US will hold the maximum allowable share of the fund under its legal regulations. However, reports suggest that Kyiv strongly opposed the original US demand for $500 billion in Ukrainian mineral wealth. Leading to the removal of this clause.
Former Ukrainian Minister Tymofiy Mylovanov described the shifting negotiations: “The US administration started with a deal that challenged Ukraine’s sovereignty. Then pushed an exploitative one that would bankrupt the country. Now, they’ve shifted to a reasonable deal with co-ownership and no direct claims on past aid. That could actually benefit Ukraine.”
Despite these developments, tensions remain high, particularly over security provisions.
Zelensky has repeatedly emphasized that any economic agreement with Washington should be accompanied by firm security guarantees. However, he stated on Wednesday that the current deal did not include any security guarantees.
“I wanted to have a sentence on security guarantees for Ukraine, and it’s important that it’s there,” Zelensky explained. He stressed that without guarantees, peace talks and ceasefire efforts would be ineffective.
Trump has made it clear that the US will not offer broad security guarantees beyond what is already in place. He suggested that the presence of American workers in Ukraine’s mineral sector would serve as a form of “automatic security.” Meanwhile, the published agreement merely states that the US “supports Ukraine’s efforts to obtain security guarantees to build lasting peace.”
The prospect of a US-Ukraine minerals deal was first raised by Zelensky last year as a way to ensure continued American support. Trump reinforced this perspective, stating that Ukraine would have the “right to fight on” in exchange for mineral access. He also hinted that the US would maintain supplies of equipment and ammunition “until we have a deal with Russia.”
However, as the negotiations unfold, uncertainties surrounding security, economic terms, and geopolitical dynamics continue to cloud the future of the US-Ukraine minerals deal. With Ukraine caught between its urgent need for resources and Washington’s strategic interests, the final outcome remains highly unpredictable.
“Real-Time Interaction in a Digital World”
