Cabal deal. New draft of "minerals deal" with Trump is even worse than before

Dancing around the topic nearly led Ukraine to a complete break in relations with Washington following the infamous quarrel on March 28.

Fortunately, British diplomats, generously dispatched to Ukraine by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, helped defuse tensions. However, Trump has been clear about seeing Ukraine primarily as a resource.

So, American officials have sent Ukraine’s Cabinet a new draft of the agreement. Many have already pointed out that this version of the "mineral deal" bears little resemblance to traditional diplomacy or international relations.

But let me quote The Daily Telegraph’s striking assessment: “Donald Trump is holding a gun to the head of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, demanding huge reparations payments and laying claim to half of Ukraine’s oil, gas, and hydrocarbon resources as well as almost all its metals and much of its infrastructure.”

As expected, the new draft includes no guarantees, no safeguards, and offers nothing in return. Yet, the cynical members of the new administration are pushing to integrate Ukraine into the U.S. oil, gas, and resource sectors — as little more than a province.

Let's take a look at an unfortunate reality: while Trump is slowly beginning to question whether Putin truly seeks peace, his envoy, Steve Witkoff, is busy negotiating a massive billion-dollar deal with Kirill Dmitriev — Putin’s latest gift.

Meanwhile, the attempts to sell Ukraine an illusion exist in a parallel universe to ongoing U.S.-Russia negotiations over a sweeping energy partnership, which includes plans to restore large-scale West Siberian gas flows to Europe. Notably, American companies and financiers closely tied to Trump stand to claim a significant stake in the business.

So, what exactly does the new 58-page version of the "minerals deal" propose?

First, there are no security guarantees — not even a vague suggestion of them. The United States considers the aid provided since 2022 to be its full contribution to Ukraine’s security and defense.

This version of the agreement requires Ukraine to compensate the U.S. for the total cost of that assistance — approximately $120 billion. To President Zelenskyy’s credit, he has repeatedly stressed that this is a red line, insisting that all aid was given on an irrevocable basis.

Secondly, if Ukraine were to sign this agreement, any future amendments would require U.S. approval. Washington would hold a "controlling stake" in all new infrastructure projects and retain the right to veto resource sales to other countries. Donald Trump and his cohort are no longer just eyeing rare earth metals — they want everything.

Revenue from mining would be funneled into a fund controlled by five individuals — three of whom would be from the U.S. with full veto power. The money would be transferred abroad, and if any expected deliveries fell short, Ukraine would be forced to pay for that.

To be precise, the Ukrainian government would be required to immediately convert the fund’s income into U.S. dollars and transfer it to American-controlled foreign accounts upon request — without any fees. If any transaction fees do apply, Ukraine must cover them as well.

This proposal — eerily similar to the folder Scott Bessent brought to Kyiv in mid-February — should not be approved by Zelenskyy or by the so-called lawmakers, many of whom have been hastily packing their bags in recent weeks. In their rush, they are attempting to shield key registers from the prying eyes of journalists, all while naively believing that National Guard brigades will suppress protests on Bankova Street with tear gas and firearms.

So what should be done about this deal, which hands Trump control over Ukraine’s natural resources while stripping Kyiv not only of its money but also its rights?

The only viable option for Kyiv is to refuse to sign and push for further negotiations. While Ukrainian officials can’t openly call this agreement what it truly is — an outright scam — in closed-door discussions, they must convince Trump’s team that this is simply not how things work.

This has already happened in previous negotiation rounds when part of the U.S. president’s team was forced to concede that some of their demands were simply unrealistic. Now, it’s time to draft a new document.

The fresh faces behind this version of the agreement clearly fail to grasp the difference between a sovereign state and a corporate business deal. But in an era of post-truth and self-proclaimed new heroes, Ukraine must fight to avoid being reduced to a mere raw material appendage — especially due to someone’s personal grudges.

Revisiting the February 28 agreement would be the best course of action. Perhaps the Presidential Office should expand its advisory team and bring in experienced figures like Lana Zerkal, Andriy Kobolyev, Valeriy Chaly, and Vadym Prystaiko. Otherwise, the next draft might come with an even more humiliating clause — turning Ukrainians into mere “reservation inhabitants,” with echoes of a colonial past.

Exclusively for Espreso

About the author: Maryna Danyliuk-Yarmolaieva, journalist

The editorial team does not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.