The 'Minerals Deal' Is Forcing Washington and Moscow to Rethink the Ukraine War

On the 8th of May 2025, Ukraine’s parliament ratified the long-awaited ‘minerals deal’, signed with the US at the end of April this year. 338 deputies from Ukraine’s parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, voted in favour of ratifying the agreement, with none opposing the decision. 

The agreement establishes a joint reconstruction investment fund between Ukraine and the US, allowing the US “special access to projects developing Ukraine’s natural resources”. 

There are some noteworthy aspects of this deal. Firstly, the agreement establishes that the fund will be “financed exclusively from new licenses”, with fifty per cent of revenues generated from activities resulting from these licenses directed to it. This applies to licenses across 57 mineral resources, including oil, gas, and rare earth metals. Additionally, the agreement sets out that any military aid delivered to Ukraine by the US from this point forward will count towards the US’s contribution to the fund, with the capital contribution of the US partner deemed to be “increased by the assessed value of such military assistance”. 

However, the absence of an upfront payment to the US by Ukraine is perhaps the most eye-catching part of the agreement. Trump has previously stated that Ukraine owes the US huge sums of money for the military support delivered by the Biden administration. This was one of the elements holding up the deal, with Zelensky adamantly opposed to such a notion. The ‘minerals deal’ ratified this month does not dictate that Ukraine pays this support back as debt.

Finally, the Trump administration has some skin in the game. No clause guarantees Trump a domestic policy victory irrespective of what happens to Ukraine. Instead, the 47th US President has two options if he wants to see the US profit from the ‘minerals deal’: negotiate a peace deal that works for Ukraine and Russia or continue to support Ukraine with military aid. 

And, of course, any peace deal agreed can no longer be a hastily concluded accord that hands Trump the opportunity to complete a crucial election pledge, whilst forcing Ukraine to cede vast swathes of territory to Putin, because that would in turn harm the gains the US is set to make from the agreement. 

Back in March, I wrote that it would be entirely logical for Russia to stall peace talks, dragging the conflict out as much as possible, which appears to have been the case so far, with very little progress made since then. With the ‘minerals deal’ now in place, this no longer works for the US, and it appears that Trump is shifting the narrative to reflect that. 

Even in the last few days, President Trump has taken to social media to vent his frustrations, writing on Truth Social that everybody should want the war in Ukraine to stop, and that failure to reach a ceasefire and negotiate peace will lead the US and its partners to “impose further sanctions”. Reading between the lines, this is certainly a jab at Putin, who has borne the burden of US sanctions so far. 

This threat to Russia follows on from comments the US President made after meeting Zelensky at the Vatican late last month, mere days before the final agreement was signed. This was the first meeting of the two leaders since the calamitous showdown in the White House in February, which ended with the two nations more divided than ever. However, after the Vatican discussion, Trump was remarkably reflective, noting that Putin’s actions made him “think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along, and has to be dealt with differently”. A far cry from the accusatory bravado of previous months, Trump seems to be adopting a stance that focuses less on Zelensky’s actions to stop the war, and more on Putin’s deliberate attempts to drag out the conflict and make negotiations more challenging.

Even Vice President Vance, deeply sceptical of Ukraine and Zelensky, has started to change his tune. Many will remember his vicious attack on the Ukrainian President in February, where Vance accused Zelensky of never having said thank you for the support that the US has given. That tone has changed slightly. On Wednesday this week, the 7th of May, Vance spoke at a security conference in Washington, in which he lamented that Putin was “asking for too much”, rather than negotiating towards a reasonable peace settlement. For someone who has, in the past, stated that he “doesn’t really care what happens to Ukraine,” the sudden switch towards criticism of Russia’s decency is a surprise. 

Thus, there’s been a change in Washington’s thinking. The ‘minerals deal’ has tied American economic interests directly to Ukraine’s future stability and resource development, making a drawn-out war or a Ukrainian defeat far less tolerable, even to those in the White House who were once indifferent to Kyiv’s fate. With Trump and his allies softening their stance and frustrations growing with Russia, the heat is starting to be turned up on Moscow, putting pressure on Putin to come to the negotiating table more seriously, as opposed to making ridiculous demands that Ukraine can’t entertain. Whether this new mix of economic stakes and political pressure will break the deadlock remains to be seen, but it has already changed the game.

The real question now is whether these shifting interests can be turned into progress and bring the war closer to an end.

Image: Flickr/President of Ukraine

Licence.

No image changes made.