Trading minerals for U.S. security guarantees must not turn Ukraine into resource provider — Ukrainian economist

He shared his thoughts with Espreso TV.

"Is it realistic or not?" Nepran asked. "It's quite realistic, because we have important metals like lithium, titanium, and uranium, especially in the Kirovohrad and Zhytomyr regions. These are key metals for the U.S. right now, especially uranium since Russia has been the main supplier. Any alternative to Russian resources will interest them. Are we (Ukraine - ed.) interested? Yes, we are. But the key will be how wisely our leaders negotiate with the U.S. to avoid just becoming a supplier of raw materials for their economy," he explained.

He also stressed that it shouldn't just be about extracting resources, but also producing them in Ukraine.

"The point is to use this in the national interest. We shouldn’t become just a source of raw materials. If we’re exchanging security for minerals, it shouldn’t only be about mining. We should also focus on production. Ukraine shouldn’t just mine lithium, but also build factories for electrical engineering and produce lithium batteries and electric vehicles. It’s not a problem to reopen car plants like ZAZ in Zaporizhzhia or others. We used to have a strong automotive industry - Zakarpattia had an automotive cluster, Lutsk had LUAZ, and Cherkasy produced buses. We have the infrastructure to produce electric cars," he said.

• Oksana Yurynets, who served as an MP and as head of the Ukrainian delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, discussed how Ukraine could establish cooperation with the new U.S. president.