- Washington’s Demands: A Heavy Economic Toll on Ukraine
U.S. President Donald Trump to Kyiv has stirred significant controversy, with many viewing it as an unprecedented attempt to turn Ukraine into an economic vassal state. The proposed agreement, which The Telegraph reportedly obtained, grants the U.S. extensive control over Ukraine’s economy, covering everything from rare earth minerals and oil and gas reserves to ports and critical infrastructure.
The deal’s terms are so severe that they have drawn comparisons to post-war sanctions imposed on defeated nations like Germany and Japan after World War II. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, initially seeking U.S. investment to secure military and economic aid, was reportedly taken aback by the scope of Washington’s demands.
The most alarming provision in the draft deal is the U.S. claim to 50% of Ukraine’s revenues from resource extraction, ports, and infrastructure. This revenue-sharing arrangement is meant to compensate for the $500 billion Trump asserts the U.S. has given Kyiv in military and financial support.
The deal stipulates that:
- The U.S. will hold a perpetual 50% stake in Ukraine’s economic activities, including energy production, infrastructure, and raw materials extraction.
- A lien will be placed on Ukrainian revenues in favor of the U.S., ensuring that Washington gets paid first, regardless of Ukraine’s financial situation.
- The U.S. will have a right of first refusal on all future licenses to extract and export minerals, ensuring American dominance over Ukraine’s resource wealth.
A source close to the negotiations summed it up bluntly: “That clause means ‘pay us first, and then feed your children.’”
Perhaps even more troubling for Ukraine is the legal framework outlined in the agreement. The contract states that disputes will be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles, effectively granting the U.S. sovereign immunity in any legal conflicts.
This provision gives the U.S. near-total leverage in deciding the fate of Ukraine’s economic future, as any disputes would be settled in American courts rather than in an international or neutral legal setting.
The proposed joint investment fund—intended to prevent “hostile parties” from benefiting from Ukraine’s reconstruction—would give Washington overwhelming control over how Ukraine’s resources are monetized. The U.S. would have the exclusive right to decide the method, selection criteria, and terms of all future licenses and projects, further solidifying its grip over Ukraine’s economy.
Effectively, Ukraine would have little to no autonomy in deciding how its own resources are developed, with American interests calling the shots.
Ironically, it was Zelenskyy himself who initially floated the idea of granting the U.S. a direct stake in Ukraine’s mineral resources during a visit to Trump Tower in September 2024. His rationale was that if American corporations had financial interests in Ukraine, Washington would be more inclined to provide long-term support against Russia.
However, Zelenskyy did not anticipate that Trump’s demands would go far beyond investment and veer into what some analysts are calling “economic colonization.”
At a recent security conference in Munich, Zelenskyy confirmed that he had instructed his ministers to reject the draft agreement:
“I didn’t let the ministers sign a relevant agreement because, in my view, it is not ready to protect us, our interests.”
Despite this rejection, U.S. officials are reportedly pressuring Kyiv to accept the terms. White House National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes defended the deal, arguing that:
“Binding economic ties with the United States will be the best guarantee against future aggression and an integral part of lasting peace. The U.S. recognizes this, the Russians recognize this, and the Ukrainians must recognize this.”
One key aspect of the deal is Ukraine’s vast mineral wealth, estimated to be worth over $12 trillion. Among these resources are critical minerals such as titanium, lithium, beryllium, manganese, gallium, uranium, zirconium, graphite, and nickel—all essential for modern technology, including military hardware and renewable energy.
These resources have made Ukraine an attractive prospect for global superpowers. Russia has already occupied nearly 50% of Ukraine’s rare earth mineral deposits, and Zelenskyy has warned that Moscow could share these resources with adversaries like North Korea and Iran, intensifying geopolitical tensions.
Trump has openly stated that American aid to Ukraine should be secured by rare earth minerals:
“We’re looking to strike a deal where Ukraine secures what we’re giving them with their rare earths and other things.”
With global competition for these critical materials heating up, Washington’s push for control over Ukraine’s minerals appears to be a strategic move aimed at securing long-term access to these valuable resources.
The Telegraph reports that Trump’s deal not only places a massive financial burden on Ukraine but fails to hold Russia accountable for any financial reparations. Unlike Germany after World War II, which had to pay significant reparations under the Versailles Treaty, Moscow would face no similar economic penalties under this agreement.
Some analysts argue that Trump’s approach is dangerously shortsighted—it prioritizes securing American economic dominance over Ukraine while allowing Russia to escape financial consequences for its invasion.
“If this draft were accepted, Trump’s demands would amount to a higher share of Ukrainian GDP than reparations imposed on Germany at the Versailles Treaty,” the report states.
This aspect of the deal has raised concerns that the U.S. is using the Ukraine war as a means to profit rather than seeking a fair and sustainable resolution to the conflict.
With Ukraine under immense military pressure from Russia and now facing economic pressure from the U.S., Zelenskyy is in an impossible situation.
- Rejecting the U.S. deal means risking a potential reduction in American aid, which could be catastrophic for Ukraine’s war effort.
- Accepting the deal means relinquishing significant economic sovereignty and effectively turning Ukraine into a U.S.-controlled economic zone.
For now, Kyiv is resisting Washington’s pressure, but the Biden administration—or a potential second Trump presidency—could continue to push for this agreement in one form or another.
Meanwhile, European leaders have expressed concern about the implications of such a deal, fearing that Ukraine could become a playground for American corporate interests rather than a truly independent nation.
As Ukraine fights for its survival against Russia, it now faces a second battle: economic survival. Trump’s proposed deal presents an unprecedented challenge, forcing Kyiv to choose between financial dependency on Washington and its long-term sovereignty.
With the U.S. leveraging its financial support to secure massive economic concessions, Ukraine finds itself in a no-win situation—caught between the demands of its most powerful ally and the brutal reality of war.
Will Ukraine withstand the pressure and secure a more favorable deal, or will it be forced into economic submission?
For now, the world watches as Kyiv navigates the treacherous waters of war, diplomacy, and economic survival.
