US weapons for raw materials: will Kyiv agree?
US President Donald Trump has demanded valuable raw materials in exchange for further military and financial support for Ukraine. A similar proposal was already part of the "Victory Plan" presented by Volodymyr Zelensky last September, but the Ukrainian president has now explained that the deal can only work if his country receives genuine security guarantees.
Exploited by all sides
This is no way to treat an ally, Censor.net comments, criticising the US:
“This isn't support, it's a re-colonisation. The Americans don't see Ukraine as an ally but as a territory from which they can squeeze the maximum benefit. They want to leave us dependent, exhausted and controlled. The irony is that we once had nuclear weapons. Ukraine was the third largest nuclear power in the world, but then signed the Budapest Memorandum, giving up its arsenal in exchange for 'security guarantees' from the US, Britain and Russia. And where are those guarantees now? Russia has come to kill, America is trying to make money, and Ukraine is fighting for survival. We can no longer afford to be naive.”
Worthless without real guarantees
Ukrainska Pravda also draws parallels with the situation in 1994:
“Clearly it's important for Putin to transform Ukraine's heroic desire for independence into another Budapest Memorandum. This time, however, Ukraine is being asked to hand over its rare earths instead of its nuclear weapons. But is it clear on the other side of the Atlantic that Russia will not just lay claim to Ukraine this time (in the absense of real guarantees apart from those on paper)?”
A win-win situation
Commenting in in Obozrevatel, political scientist Serhiy Taran sees advantages for both sides:
“The US could reduce its dependence on Chinese imports, ensure the production of defence and high-tech goods, and strengthen the geopolitical position of the US and its allies in the competition with China. Ukraine would get US bases, US investors and budget revenues, jobs for veterans who would happily defend the foreign capital, and of course American troops. These would be real security guarantees. ... The Russians would never dare to attack a territory where US companies are located and protected by the US army.”
Benefiting from naked pragmatism
The Daily Telegraph speculates:
“Ukraine's retention of land in Kursk could serve as a vital bargaining chip for the restoration of mineral deposits in areas of southern Ukraine that Russia does not fully control. Once a peace settlement is obtained, Ukraine hopes that these resources will bolster its strategic value to the US and ensure that Washington provides credible guarantees against future Russian aggression. As Russia refuses to seriously entertain peace negotiations, Ukraine could be the unexpected beneficiary of Trump's naked pragmatism.”
A small victory for Zelensky
Meduza comments:
“The 'aid in exchange for resources' construct does indeed look attractive for all sides of the potential deal, notwithstanding all the costs and risks associated with the war. ... And for Zelensky, too, Trump's proposal is a small victory. Firstly, although the solution has been presented as a 'deal', he has received clear approval from the new US president for the continuation of military and financial aid. Secondly, Trump has essentially agreed to one of the points in Zelensky's 'victory plan'.”