Ukraine Signals Shift in Resource Deal with the U.S. Amid Criticism of Trump's Plans

U.S. President Donald Trump is continuing efforts to finalize a resource agreement with Ukraine as negotiations appear to gain momentum. However, opposition to the proposed deal is mounting.

In an attempt to bring an end to the protracted conflict in Ukraine, which has lasted over three years, Trump is leveraging a resource deal as a key strategy. The president, known for his business acumen during his previous term, is seeking compensation for U.S. military aid in the form of access to rare earth elements. An agreement was expected to be signed weeks ago, but recent developments in Kyiv suggest a shift in the discussions.

Rather than finalizing the resource deal, a meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in late February ended in controversy. Zelenskyy recently emphasized that the terms of the agreement are subject to change during a gathering of Ukraine supporters in Paris. Teams from both Ukraine and the U.S. are currently engaged in discussions, with the U.S. now proposing a comprehensive agreement that requires detailed analysis, unlike the initially sought framework.

Reports from Bloomberg indicate that there has been progress in the negotiations concerning the resource deal. On Friday, representatives from both nations participated in a conference call to discuss the latest U.S. draft of the economic agreement. This draft reportedly grants the U.S. control over all future investments in infrastructure and resource sectors, a prospect that has raised concerns among Ukrainian officials.

Ukrainian representatives are particularly worried that the deal may jeopardize Ukraine's aspirations for European Union membership. Additionally, the terms could require Ukraine to reimburse the entirety of the military and economic support provided by the U.S. since the onset of the conflict, a scenario that Zelenskyy had previously dismissed. Such factors are contributing to renewed activity in the negotiations.

During Friday's discussions, U.S. representatives did not dismiss the concerns raised by Ukraine, which is seen as an indication that they are open to negotiating modifications to the agreement. This openness may explain the delays in finalizing the deal, despite Trump announcing earlier in the week that the agreement was nearing completion. He stated that his Treasury Secretary had informed him that the resource deal with Ukraine was nearly finalized and would soon be signed.

However, as discussions continue, many experts are questioning the feasibility of the proposed agreement. Erik Jonsson, a geologist from Uppsala University in Sweden, noted that three of the four significant resource deposits in Eastern Ukraine are located in areas currently occupied by Russian forces, under the control of President Vladimir Putin.

Even if the U.S. were able to gain access to these deposits, the economic impact may be minimal, as much of the data regarding these resources dates back to the Soviet era and should be treated with caution. Jonsson expressed skepticism regarding the relevance of these rare earth deposits.

Jack Lifton from the Critical Minerals Institute echoed similar sentiments, stating that Ukraine is not the ideal location for sourcing critical minerals. He described Trump's initiative as fanciful, noting that establishing a mine for rare earths would take approximately 15 years.

Despite these warnings, Trump remains committed to pursuing the agreement. His approach reflects a broader ambition during his second term, which is characterized by a desire for expansion. In recent weeks, Trump has reiterated claims to Canadian resources and Greenland, which is also known for its rare earth deposits. Notably, Vice President J.D. Vance's recent visit to Greenland has drawn attention.

The resource agreement with Ukraine is emblematic of Trump's strategy to seek compensation for U.S. investments in the Ukrainian conflict. This issue led to significant controversy in Washington just weeks ago, when Zelenskyy faced criticism for perceived ingratitude during a meeting with Trump and Vance, broadcasted to the public.

Trump has consistently argued that the international community, particularly the EU, takes advantage of the United States economically. His actions appear aimed at demonstrating strength to his supporters, and even a partial success could be portrayed as a significant achievement for his administration. The motivation within Washington to finalize the agreement remains strong.