Ukraine is finalizing a landmark minerals deal with the US, offering access to its vast reserves of lithium, graphite, and rare earth metals in exchange for security guarantees and economic investment. The negotiations, driven by wartime urgency and global energy shifts, could redefine US-China competition and Ukraine’s post-war recovery.
Ukraine’s Mineral Wealth: A Strategic Asset
Ukraine holds 5% of the world’s critical raw materials, including:
- Graphite: 19 million tonnes (top 5 global reserves).
- Lithium: 30% of Europe’s deposits.
- Titanium: 7% of global pre-war production.
- Rare Earth Metals: Essential for weapons, electronics, and renewables.
However, $350bn worth of these resources are under Russian occupation, per Ukraine’s Economy Ministry. Moscow controls 63% of Ukrainian coal and half its manganese, cesium, and tantalum, per a 2022 SecDev report.
Why the US Wants a Deal
- Reducing China Dependence: China controls 75% of rare earth mining. Recent export bans to the US heighten urgency.
- Green Energy Goals: Lithium and graphite are vital for EV batteries; titanium for aerospace.
- Geopolitical Leverage: Securing Ukrainian minerals weakens Russia’s resource grip and strengthens NATO supply chains.
“Critical minerals are the foundation of the 21st-century economy,” says Dr. Robert Muggah of SecDev. “They’re key to military, industrial, and renewable energy dominance.”
Negotiation Sticking Points
- Revenue Split: Trump initially demanded 50% of rare earth profits, later revising to full control. Zelensky rejected both, calling it a “sellout.”
- Security Guarantees: Ukraine seeks binding US commitments to its sovereignty post-war.
- Tech Transfers: Kyiv wants US expertise to modernize mining, lacking since Soviet-era decline.
Boris Johnson framed the deal as “the great prize” to lock in US support under Trump. Critics call terms “colonial,” but Ukraine’s Iryna Suprun (Geological Investment Group) argues: “American investment means jobs, taxes, and tech we desperately need.”
Risks and Rewards
For Ukraine:
- Pros: Post-war economic revival, NATO-aligned security, reduced corruption via US oversight.
- Cons: Sovereignty concerns, public backlash over foreign control, environmental risks.
For the US:
- Pros: Diversified supply chains, countering China, EV market leverage.
- Cons: High upfront costs, long-term dependency on a conflict zone.
What’s Next?
- Deal Signing: Likely before November’s US election to secure Trump’s endorsement.
- Implementation: Joint ventures could launch in 2025, focusing on unoccupied regions like western Ukraine.
- Global Ripples: China may retaliate with trade measures; EU seeks similar deals to avoid exclusion.
Final Take
Ukraine’s minerals are a bargaining chip for survival, while the US eyes a strategic win against China. The deal’s success hinges on balancing Ukraine’s sovereignty with US demands—a tightrope walk in a war-torn landscape.
