US and Ukraine sign minerals deal

[jerryskids 6,558]

Quote

US and Ukraine sign minerals deal that solidifies investment in Kyiv’s defense against Russia

Move seals a deal to create a fund the Trump administration says will begin to repay roughly $175bn provided to Ukraine

The US and Kyiv have signed an agreement to share profits and royalties from the future sale of Ukrainian minerals and rare earths, sealing a deal that Donald Trump has said will provide an economic incentive for the US to continue to invest in Ukraine’s defense and its reconstruction after he brokers a peace deal with Russia.

The minerals deal, which has been the subject of tense negotiations for months and nearly fell through hours before it was signed, will establish a US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund that the Trump administration has said will begin to repay an estimated $175bn in aid provided to Ukraine since the beginning of the war.

“This agreement signals clearly to Russia that the Trump administration is committed to a peace process centered on a free, sovereign, and prosperous Ukraine over the long term,” said Scott Bessent, the US treasury secretary, in a statement.

“President Trump envisioned this partnership between the American people and the Ukrainian people to show both sides’ commitment to lasting peace and prosperity in Ukraine. And to be clear, no state or person who financed or supplied the Russian war machine will be allowed to benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine.”

Ukraine’s first deputy prime minister, Yulia Svyrydenko, confirmed in a social media post that she had signed the agreement on Wednesday. “Together with the United States, we are creating the fund that will attract global investment into our country,” she wrote. The deal still needs to be approved by Ukraine’s parliament.

Ukrainian officials have divulged details of the agreement which they portrayed as equitable and allowing Ukraine to maintain control over its natural resources.

The Ukrainian prime minister, Denys Shmyhal, said that the fund would be split 50-50 with between the US and Ukraine and give each side equal voting rights.

Ukraine would retain “full control over its mineral resources, infrastructure and natural resources,” he said, and would relate only to new investments, meaning that the deal would not provide for any debt obligations against Ukraine, a key concern for Kyiv. The deal would ensure revenue by establishing contracts on a “take-or-pay” basis, Shmyhal added.

Shmyhal on Wednesday described the deal as “truly a good, equal and beneficial international agreement on joint investments in the development and recovery of Ukraine”.

Critics of the deal had said the White House is seeking to take advantage of Ukraine by linking future aid to the embattled nation to a giveaway of the revenues from its resources. The final terms were far less onerous for Ukraine than those proposed initially by Bessent in February, which included a clause that the US would control 100% of the revenues from the fund.

It was unclear up until the last moment whether the US and Ukraine would manage to sign the deal, with Washington reportedly pressuring Ukraine to sign additional agreements, including on the structure of the investment fund, or to “go back home”. That followed months of strained negotiations during which the US regularly delivered last-minute ultimatums while cutting off aid and other support for Ukraine in its defence against Russia.

Ukraine’s prime minister earlier had said he expected the country to sign the minerals deal with the US in “the next 24 hours” but reports emerged that Washington was insisting Kyiv sign three deals in total.

The Financial Times said Bessent’s team had told Svyrydenko, who was reportedly en route to Washington DC, to “be ready to sign all agreements, or go back home”.

Bessent later said the US was ready to sign though Ukraine had made some last-minute changes.

Reuters reported that Ukraine believed the two supplementary agreements – reportedly on an investment fund and a technical document – required more work.

The idea behind the deal was originally proposed by Ukraine, looking for ways to offer economic opportunities that might entice Trump to back the country. But Kyiv was blindsided in January when Trump’s team delivered a document that would essentially involve handing over the country’s mineral wealth with little by way of return.

Since then, there have been various attempts to revise and revisit the terms of the deal, as well as a planned signing ceremony that was aborted after a disastrous meeting between Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House in February.

Earlier this month, it was revealed that the Ukrainian justice ministry had hired US law firm Hogan Lovells to advise on the negotiations over the deal, according to filings with the US Foreign Agents Registration Act registry.

In a post on Facebook, Ukraine’s first deputy prime minister Yulia Svyrydenko gave further details of the fund, which she said would “attract global investment”.

She confirmed that Ukraine would retain full ownership of resources “on our territory and in territorial waters belong to Ukraine”. “It is the Ukrainian state that determines where and what to extract,” she said.

There would be no changes to ownership of state-owned companies, she said, “they will continue to belong to Ukraine”. That included companies such as Ukrnafta, Ukraine’s largest oil producer, and nuclear energy producer Energoatom.

Income would come from new licences for critical materials and oil and gas projects, not from projects which had already begun, she said.

Income and contributions to the fund would not be taxed in the US or Ukraine, she said, “to make investments yield the greatest results”.

Razom for Ukraine, a US nonprofit that provides medical and humanitarian aid to Ukraine and advocates for US assistance, welcomed the deal, and encouraged the Trump administration to increase pressure on Vladimir Putin to end the invasion. “We encourage the Trump administration to build on the momentum of this economic agreement by forcing Putin to the table through sanctions, seizing Russia’s state assets to aid Ukraine, and giving Ukraine the tools it needs to defend itself,” Mykola Murskyj, director of advocacy for Razom, said in a statement.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/30/us-ukraine-minerals-deal-russia

Winning.  At least if you are pro America.   

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

Yeah,you gotta put up with some of the dumb shitt the guy says, but no one else even comes close to thinking, never mind doing, big things like this. More please 

[The Real timschochet 6,407]

This is a good deal for the U.S. and Ukraine, providing we don’t abandon Ukraine. 

Obviously I oppose most of what Trump has accomplished so far and think he has been awful, much worse than last time around. But this is a solid achievement for the USA and I think it will be remembered as a lasting positive legacy for his Presidency. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

Liberals think “Tell Vladimir that I’ll have more flexibility after the election” was some sharp foreign policy.  lol. 

[Tebok 307]

12 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is a good deal for the U.S. and Ukraine, providing we don’t abandon Ukraine. 

Obviously I oppose most of what Trump has accomplished so far and think he has been awful, much worse than last time around. But this is a solid achievement for the USA and I think it will be remembered as a lasting positive legacy for his Presidency. 

It certainly means some progress and that we're not going to just abandon Ukraine.

Would love to see MAGAs follow their cult leader's lead and support Ukraine.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

I support Ukraine as long as we don’t have to pay or send troops. Yeah, Fock the Russians then. And as long as Zelenskyy or whatever puppet is running shitt there knows who the boss is. 

[Ron_Artest 1,046]

Everything with Trump is transactional.  I don't like the idea of taking money out of Ukraine that they will need to rebuild after the war.

Zelensky is much smarter than trump so I'm interested to see how this plays out.  I don't see why they would just let the US take their minerals.  We don't know what the split is, maybe it's 50/50 and they assume that it comes with some kind of security.

[supermike80 1,801]

59 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is a good deal for the U.S. and Ukraine, providing we don’t abandon Ukraine. 

Obviously I oppose most of what Trump has accomplished so far and think he has been awful, much worse than last time around. But this is a solid achievement for the USA and I think it will be remembered as a lasting positive legacy for his Presidency. 

Jesus Christ youre exhausting

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

19 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

Everything with Trump is transactional.  I don't like the idea of taking money out of Ukraine that they will need to rebuild after the war.

Zelensky is much smarter than trump so I'm interested to see how this plays out.  I don't see why they would just let the US take their minerals.  We don't know what the split is, maybe it's 50/50 and they assume that it comes with some kind of security.

Wow. You read nothing. Good work. 

[Tebok 307]

15 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

You read nothing.

[seafoam1 2,799]

Biden is off somewhere drooling into his applesauce....

[Gepetto 1,288]

1 hour ago, Ron_Artest said:

Everything with Trump is transactional.  I don't like the idea of taking money out of Ukraine that they will need to rebuild after the war.

Zelensky is much smarter than trump so I'm interested to see how this plays out.  I don't see why they would just let the US take their minerals.  We don't know what the split is, maybe it's 50/50 and they assume that it comes with some kind of security.

The third sentence from the o.p. 

The US and Kyiv have signed an agreement to share profits and royalties from the future sale of Ukrainian minerals and rare earths, sealing a deal that Donald Trump has said will provide an economic incentive for the US to continue to invest in Ukraine’s defense and its reconstruction after he brokers a peace deal with Russia.

[weepaws 3,153]

4 hours ago, supermike80 said:

Jesus Christ youre exhausting

You’re just burned out.  

[SaintsInDome2006 378]

13 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Move seals a deal to create a fund the Trump administration says will begin to repay roughly $175bn provided to Ukraine

This cracks me up. I’m in favor of the agreement as constituted but it’s not what Trump sold it to his followers as. This is the way he sold ‘the wall’, claiming Mexico would pay for it.

[MDC 7,124]

Sounds like a good deal.  

[SaintsInDome2006 378]

13 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Ukraine’s first deputy prime minister, Yulia Svyrydenko, confirmed in a social media post that she had signed the agreement on Wednesday. “Together with the United States, we are creating the fund that will attract global investment into our country,” she wrote. The deal still needs to be approved by Ukraine’s parliament.

Ukrainian officials have divulged details of the agreement which they portrayed as equitable and allowing Ukraine to maintain control over its natural resources.

The Ukrainian prime minister, Denys Shmyhal, said that the fund would be split 50-50 with between the US and Ukraine and give each side equal voting rights.

Ukraine would retain “full control over its mineral resources, infrastructure and natural resources,” he said, and would relate only to new investments, meaning that the deal would not provide for any debt obligations against Ukraine, a key concern for Kyiv. The deal would ensure revenue by establishing contracts on a “take-or-pay” basis, Shmyhal added.

Shmyhal on Wednesday described the deal as “truly a good, equal and beneficial international agreement on joint investments in the development and recovery of Ukraine”.

And this is great. With Trump his whole thing is promoting himself, & Ukraine took advantage of that. Trump repeatedly got out over his skis with over-promising & grandiose demands & he was desperate for it, especially with the tariff disaster.

Here’s what’s really great about this: more Americans & more American businesses in Ukraine. This will make Russia’s terroristic bombing spree even riskier because if & when they hit Americans it will draw the US closer in to direct support.

This also brings Ukraine closer to joining the EU, which IMO has always been Putin’s biggest fear, not NATO. & the US commercial & financial involvement will only impel greater reform. 
 

The way this has turned out, I’m all for it. And if maga loves it all the better.

[Mike Honcho 5,096]

14 hours ago, jerryskids said:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/30/us-ukraine-minerals-deal-russia

Winning.  At least if you are pro America.   

Yes, winning.  I remember the celebrations when we negotiated the deals to fight Hitler. ABC - Always Be Closing when standing up to dictators and anti-democratic ideologies.   

 

BTW, how's the Riviera of the Middle East developing? 

[thegeneral 2,894]

Who is doing the mining? Is that laid out in this deal?

[jerryskids 6,558]

Our center-right posters haven't disappointed in this thread.   

[GobbleDog 982]

Ukraine's supposed mineral deposits are based on 50 year old Soviet surveys, so the actual amount is questionable. In order to extract them multi-billions are required to set up towns (most in remote areas), employ miners, and buy/maintain specialized equipment. From what I've read it could take decades to see a return on investment.

But hey Trump made a deal.  Makes the US look like extortionists, but if it marks a turn-around in Trump's support for Ukraine, so be it. Future Presidents could very well modify or just outright terminate the deal.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

2 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Ukraine's supposed mineral deposits are based on 50 year old Soviet surveys, so the actual amount is questionable. In order to extract them multi-billions are required to set up towns (most in remote areas), employ miners, and buy/maintain specialized equipment. From what I've read it could take decades to see a return on investment.

But hey Trump made a deal.  Makes the US look like extortionists, but if it marks a turn-around in Trump's support for Ukraine, so be it. Future Presidents could very well modify or just outright terminate the deal.

As opposed to Bidens deal making, which entailed blank checks with no oversight. Remember when the democrats actual squashed any oversight? Yeah, that happened. 

[Sean Mooney 1,937]

On its surface a good deal. There are some unknown things yet but this should work out overall

[GobbleDog 982]

7 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

As opposed to Bidens deal making, which entailed blank checks with no oversight. Remember when the democrats actual squashed any oversight? Yeah, that happened. 

I don't defend Biden. Didn't give enough support or economic pressure on Russia, and should've permitted long-range strikes from day one. I'll give ya there probably wasn't enough oversight on spending - rarely is with the government. 

I do know Biden didn't take to Twitter the day Russia invaded Ukraine and call Putin "Genius... Brilliant!". Biden didn't call Zelensky a dictator or insanely accuse Ukraine of starting the war. Biden didn't align with Russia and North Korea in opposing a UN resolution simply condemning Russia's aggression. Biden didn't threaten to cut off support unless Ukraine signed a mineral deal as "repayment for $500 billion" even though only $150 billion was granted to them. Etc..  

How do ya defend all that?  "Well, Biden didn't have enough oversight." That's it? 

[Engorgeous George 2,125]

13 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

Biden is off somewhere drooling into his applesauce....

I heard he is more of a tapioca pudding man, but you may be right.

[Engorgeous George 2,125]

1 hour ago, Mike Honcho said:

Yes, winning.  I remember the celebrations when we negotiated the deals to fight Hitler. ABC - Always Be Closing when standing up to dictators and anti-democratic ideologies.   

 

BTW, how's the Riviera of the Middle East developing? 

As I understand it the demolition is underway to clear out the dilapidated properties making way for the new and the current tenants are being evicted (exterminated).  I know this much, no matter how Riviera Maya it becomes I will not stay there to attend a music festival.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

19 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

I don't defend Biden. Didn't give enough support or economic pressure on Russia, and should've permitted long-range strikes from day one. I'll give ya there probably wasn't enough oversight on spending - rarely is with the government. 

I do know Biden didn't take to Twitter the day Russia invaded Ukraine and call Putin "Genius... Brilliant!". Biden didn't call Zelensky a dictator or insanely accuse Ukraine of starting the war. Biden didn't align with Russia and North Korea in opposing a UN resolution simply condemning Russia's aggression. Biden didn't threaten to cut off support unless Ukraine signed a mineral deal as "repayment for $500 billion" even though only $150 billion was granted to them. Etc..  

How do ya defend all that?  "Well, Biden didn't have enough oversight." That's it? 

I’m defending Trump by making a comparison to Biden. Why can’t you address that? You think no oversight of Billions and billions is good? Also, you don’t have that post defending Biden after saying you weren’t. Defend the lack of oversight.  

[The Real timschochet 6,407]

28 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I’m defending Trump by making a comparison to Biden. Why can’t you address that? You think no oversight of Billions and billions is good? Also, you don’t have that post defending Biden after saying you weren’t. Defend the lack of oversight.  

There’s nothing to defend because your facts are wrong. Most of the money we have spent on Ukraine has gone to our own defense industries. Most of the value Ukraine received has been in the form of weaponry: 

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine

This talk about billions in cash going to Ukraine without any supervision…it’s all a lot of crap. You’re being lied to and you’re eagerly repeating the lies here. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

There’s nothing to defend because your facts are wrong. Most of the money we have spent on Ukraine has gone to our own defense industries. Most of the value Ukraine received has been in the form of weaponry: 

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine

This talk about billions in cash going to Ukraine without any supervision…it’s all a lot of crap. You’re being lied to and you’re eagerly repeating the lies here. 

Really, so Schumer didn’t shut down the request for oversight before the spending was approved? You are either lying or ignorant.  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

Real Stupid Tim thinks there should be no oversight of US defense industries.  How exactly do you cross the street on your own? I don’t think you do. 

[The Real timschochet 6,407]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Real Stupid Tim thinks there should be no oversight of US defense industries.  How exactly do you cross the street on your own? I don’t think you do. 

Of course there should be oversight of US defense, but now you’re moving the goalposts. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,924]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

Of course there should be oversight of US defense, but now you’re moving the goalposts. 

I said oversight. You came flying in with your nonsense about tie spending going to US defense industries. Because they would never rip off the US government.  You froth at the mouth when plain facts you don’t like are presented and spout the first dumb thing that comes to mind. Like a hysterical woman. 

[SaintsInDome2006 378]

14 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

Biden is off somewhere drooling into his applesauce....

Yes, I'm sure when he awakens the father of the guy under investigation for doing venture capital investment deals in Ukraine will be horrified to learn the King of Maga & ketchup-thrower-in-chief just secured $175 billion in Ukraine investment. Can't wait to see who gets to handle those contracts.

[Ron_Artest 1,046]

15 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Really, so Schumer didn’t shut down the request for oversight before the spending was approved? You are either lying or ignorant.  

If Schumer did this it was either stupid or for another reason, but I have a feeling you just made it up or it's something you heard from Tucker Carlson.

[Mike Hunt 261]

17 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is a good deal for the U.S. and Ukraine, providing we don’t abandon Ukraine. 

Obviously I oppose most of what Trump has accomplished so far and think he has been awful, much worse than last time around. But this is a solid achievement for the USA and I think it will be remembered as a lasting positive legacy for his Presidency. 

It is natural for people to resist change, and change takes time. 

The mineral deal was a good move for the USA.

Just like the NFL draft is tough to judge the first season so is a 4 year term as POTUS.  Keep an open mind and let`s see how it plays out.

[Mark Davis 339]

2 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

Ukraine's supposed mineral deposits are based on 50 year old Soviet surveys, so the actual amount is questionable. In order to extract them multi-billions are required to set up towns (most in remote areas), employ miners, and buy/maintain specialized equipment. From what I've read it could take decades to see a return on investment.

But hey Trump made a deal.  Makes the US look like extortionists, but if it marks a turn-around in Trump's support for Ukraine, so be it. Future Presidents could very well modify or just outright terminate the deal.

I don’t know the specifics or details and it sounds like you do. However, someone is going to need to provide the technology they need. I’d rather this be us than China. But what little I do know suggests as you said this is a long term payoff, not short term. Hopefully future administrations hold the course on this deal and make it beneficial for both parties. 

[Mark Davis 339]

51 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

There’s nothing to defend because your facts are wrong. Most of the money we have spent on Ukraine has gone to our own defense industries. Most of the value Ukraine received has been in the form of weaponry: 

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine

This talk about billions in cash going to Ukraine without any supervision…it’s all a lot of crap. You’re being lied to and you’re eagerly repeating the lies here. 

This is where the two sides get parted. You’re right in that most has been spent with US companies for armaments for the US. However that’s still a significant cost. Yes we gave them the old weapons and upgraded ours with newer models so to speak. But it’s at a cost, and in most cases likely could have been at the least deferred or we would have done it earlier. So the true economic incremental cost lies somewhere in between the two stories we are told. 

[The Real timschochet 6,407]

14 minutes ago, Mike Hunt said:

It is natural for people to resist change, and change takes time. 

The mineral deal was a good move for the USA.

Just like the NFL draft is tough to judge the first season so is a 4 year term as POTUS.  Keep an open mind and let`s see how it plays out.

I always keep an open mind and when things go well, as they did here, I will give him credit. But on the whole, IMO, it’s been a disaster. 

[Maximum Overkill 1,739]

Why are Liberals so old? What's that about? 

[seafoam1 2,799]

45 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Yes, I'm sure when he awakens the father of the guy under investigation for doing venture capital investment deals in Ukraine will be horrified to learn the King of Maga & ketchup-thrower-in-chief just secured $175 billion in Ukraine investment. Can't wait to see who gets to handle those contracts.

Wow. Take drugs much? 

[SaintsInDome2006 378]

9 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

Wow. Take drugs much? 

Beer guy, nope.