The White House has made its “White House Watch” newsletter available for free, providing insights into the implications of the 2024 US election for Washington and international affairs.
On Tuesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced that the United States had put forward a new proposal for a critical minerals agreement with Ukraine. This proposal significantly expands upon a framework agreement established the previous month, as part of efforts led by former President Donald Trump to resolve Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Zelenskyy indicated that he had not fully reviewed the new proposal but noted that it does not involve increased US involvement in Ukraine’s nuclear power sector, which had been suggested by Trump the previous week. Zelenskyy characterized the US proposal as a “large, comprehensive agreement.”
According to reports by the Financial Times, the Trump administration was exploring new conditions for US access to Ukraine’s critical minerals and energy assets and was considering including the potential ownership of its nuclear power facilities as part of its economic demands.
The US administration is pursuing a minerals deal to recover the substantial value of military aid provided to Ukraine since the onset of Russia’s major invasion in early 2022. The proposed agreement would bypass the previous framework stage, moving directly to discussions regarding the ownership and control of a joint investment fund.
Zelenskyy stated that the earlier process involved a framework agreement followed by the full agreement development, but now the American side proposes an immediate “grand agreement.” A US Treasury spokesperson reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to quickly finalizing this critical agreement and ensuring a lasting peace for Ukraine and Russia.
The US had initially declined to sign a critical minerals agreement following a significant disagreement at the White House involving Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and Zelenskyy, which resulted in a temporary halt of US military assistance and intelligence sharing with Kyiv.
The initial critical minerals deal, negotiated over two weeks in February, was intended to facilitate further talks about US security guarantees for Ukraine post-conflict with Russia. The White House maintains that security guarantees are intrinsic to any critical minerals agreement, asserting that US economic involvement in Ukraine would deter future Russian aggression.
Kyiv has not fully embraced this rationale and is seeking additional assurances from the US, which have not yet been provided. While many aspects of the US proposal remain unclear, Ukrainian officials are relieved that it does not require the transfer of nuclear power plants to US control. However, there is concern that their aim to secure the original agreement’s version might be overshadowed by increased economic demands.
A Ukrainian official familiar with the negotiations mentioned that while the nuclear issue had been mentioned in discussions, it was excluded from the current proposal. However, it might still emerge in subsequent negotiations linked to Trump’s initiative to end Russian aggression in Ukraine.
There was recent confusion following a conversation between Trump and Zelenskyy, during which Trump claimed to have discussed the US potentially taking control of Ukraine’s nuclear facilities. Zelenskyy clarified that their talks were limited to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in southeastern Ukraine, currently under Russian control.
