The most recent diplomatic ploy between Ukraine and the United States has taken an unexpected turn. President Volodymyr Zelensky received an ultimatum instead of the financial help talks he had anticipated. Zelensky had just one hour to accept the demand made by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent when he arrived in Kyiv: Ukraine must give America broad access to its mineral wealth. The United States demanded $500 billion in resources as restitution for previous military aid at the Munich Security Conference, which increased the pressure. By highlighting the lack of security guarantees in the proposal, Zelensky was able to postpone an agreement.
This strategy is based on Zelensky’s own “victory plan,” a five-point plan that he presented to Donald Trump and Joe Biden in October. It suggested a trade: American security support in return for Ukrainian minerals. Trump’s team seized on the resource deal but disregarded its geopolitical value, while Biden rejected it as impractical.
Ukraine’s vast mineral reserves—beryllium, graphite, hafnium, germanium, and gallium—are critical for high-tech industries. Most important to the U.S. are titanium and lithium. Ukraine supplies up to 7% of the world’s titanium and holds 10-20% of global reserves. Some lithium deposits sit near warzones, complicating extraction. Meanwhile, Russia may have quietly approached Trump’s team with its own proposal.
American involvement in Ukraine’s mining sector presents legal and logistical challenges. The constitution deems resources the property of the Ukrainian people, necessitating creative legal structuring—possibly through bonds or private U.S. oversight. However, the mining sector remains underexplored, oligarchs hold significant stakes, and bureaucratic hurdles abound. Wresting control from local elites could provoke resistance.
Even under ideal conditions, new extraction projects would take years. Trump’s team may seek immediate gains, but as Ukrainian MP Andriy Nikolayenko noted, “This is not a shop you can build in a week.” Existing operations could be transferred more swiftly, but such moves would face domestic pushback.
Ukraine now faces a critical decision: trade its mineral wealth for a continued U.S. alliance or resist economic subjugation under the guise of security cooperation. Negotiations continue, but the stakes could not be higher.
Western responses to President Zelenskyy’s remarks have progressively changed over the last six months from unrestrained fervour to a more restrained, realistic posture. His passionate appeals for assistance and bold leadership struck a chord early in the fight, inspiring tremendous support from the public and Western officials. Recent polls and studies, however, show that although core support is still strong, its fervour is subtly waning, which is indicative of geopolitical exhaustion and escalating economic worries. Essentially, Zelenskyy’s statements continue to garner crucial international support, but as the war continues, the Western tone is shifting towards cautious realism.