In a twist few expected just a month ago, Donald Trump has achieved what once seemed impossible: pushing Volodymyr Zelensky towards a deal on the controversial U.S.-Ukraine minerals agreement.
What began as a hardline demand from the U.S. president—full repayment of €300 billion in military aid—has ended with a significant reduction of that figure: €100 billion. However, the heart of the deal, which gives the U.S. major control over Ukraine’s natural resources, still worries Kyiv and its European allies.
While Washington has not confirmed it officially, U.S. media reports suggest Trump has dropped the idea of treating the aid as debt Ukraine must repay—a move seen as a rare show of flexibility. However, Ukraine’s concessions on other aspects of the agreement point more to a forced tactical retreat than a diplomatic victory.
The agreement, which has been under negotiation for months in parallel with talks for a ceasefire with Russia, revolves around creating a binational investment fund that would manage revenues generated from exploiting Ukraine’s natural resources. Oil, gas, rare earths, and other strategic minerals would be managed by an entity dominated by the United States, which would retain at least 50% of future profits.
An early draft of the agreement was labeled “predatory” by various international law experts, as it sought to impose interest on the debt, full access to mineral reserves, and even political conditions on future Ukrainian legislation. Zelensky flatly rejected the proposal at the time. But the pressure has had an effect, and today Ukrainian authorities acknowledge “substantial progress” and are preparing to sign a memorandum of understanding in the coming days.
Yulia Sviridenko, Ukraine’s Minister of Economy, announced this week that legal teams from both sides have “harmonized” many of the draft’s elements and that the country is ready to formalize the agreement. She added that there are still issues to be resolved, but she is hopeful for a “positive” result that ensures investments and benefits for both sides.”
Still, critics question whether Ukraine’s concessions amount to true partnership or a coerced compromise. “We’re talking about handing over control of strategic sectors in exchange for not becoming financial pariahs. That’s not an agreement; it’s an accepted ultimatum,” said a former Ukrainian MP in exile in Warsaw this week.
Critical voices emphasize that the text, although updated, still offers no security guarantees against future Russian aggression. Nor does it include clauses obliging the United States to reinvest part of the profits in the country’s reconstruction. Instead, it demands that Ukrainian state and private companies deposit their earnings into a joint fund under foreign control.
Europe, a silent witness
Meanwhile, Europe has remained largely on the sidelines. Although Brussels has partially financed Ukraine’s defense and aspires to integrate it into its political and economic structures, it has been excluded from the key talks between Washington and Kyiv. If signed under its current terms, the minerals agreement could shape Ukraine’s energy and fiscal policy for decades, distancing it from EU standards.
Meanwhile, the signing of the agreement could coincide with the upcoming IMF and World Bank meetings on April 25, where senior Ukrainian officials are expected to attend. If signed, this pact would mark an economic milestone and a geopolitical turning point, consolidating U.S. influence over Ukraine’s economy during its transition to the post-war era.
