The Trump administration’s primary aim in Ukraine is not a desire for peace or the protection of Kyiv but the country’s valuable mineral wealth, valued by one senior Republican at a staggering $12tn.
The unprecedented public clash inside the White House between US President Donald Trump and US Vice President JD Vance on one side and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the other was a direct result of intense pressure on Zelenskyy to sign an agreement handing the US nearly half of Ukraine’s mineral resources.
Yet Trump and Vance have not offered to do so with the security guarantees that Zelenskyy has always said he needs. For Kyiv, this is a core condition for a peace deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who Ukrainians suspect will use the ceasefire to regroup before coming back for the rest.
Minerals and money
Trump understands that Ukraine’s strategic value is as a repository of some of the world’s most critical minerals, vital to sustaining US dominance in the technology sector, where the big American tech firms’ rivals in China already have access to these so-called ‘rare earths’.
The televised clash was just one episode in Washington’s broader campaign to pressure the Ukrainian leader into relinquishing these resources and to prevent Zelenskyy from challenging Trump’s assertion that the US had given Kyiv $350bn in military aid (an amount Zelenskyy refutes).
According to the US State Department’s Bureau of Political and Military Affairs, total US aid to Ukraine from Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea to January 2025 was $163bn, with Washington having also allocated $20bn to Ukraine from the proceeds of frozen Russian assets.
Leaked details from the draft US-Ukraine minerals agreement reveal plans to create a reconstruction investment fund, jointly overseen by both governments. Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal recently stated that Kyiv would allocate half of the future revenues from state-owned natural resource projects to this fund, with the proceeds reinvested in the development of these projects.
Shmyhal emphasised that the agreement would exclude "current deposits, facilities, licenses, and revenues associated with the country's natural resources," clarifying that it applies only to future licenses, development initiatives, and infrastructure projects.