Resource war of the XXI century: Ukrainian minerals became a bargaining chip in the big game
Gold, oil, diamonds, rare earth metals – these resources have always been not just gifts of nature, but the cause of conflicts, territorial disputes and even large-scale wars. Over the centuries, states have conquered new lands, waged wars, overthrown governments, and plundered peoples, driven not only by ideology or politics, but also by lust for the riches hidden in the bowels of the earth. From the gold mines of ancient Egypt, which fueled brutal conquests, to the bloody “diamond wars” in Africa and the oil conflicts of the 20th and 21st centuries, history shows that natural resources often become a curse for those who possess them.
Currently, the global struggle for strategic resources is intensifying, and Ukraine has found itself at the very epicenter of this conflict. Minerals, which remained an undervalued asset for decades, have today become a major geopolitical and economic trump card. Major world players seek to secure access to the Ukrainian subsoil, so now the question is extremely important: will our country be able to use it in its interests, or does it risk turning into a raw material appendage for stronger states?
Denys Shmygal’s statement regarding useful resources
Ukrainian minerals have always been one of the country’s most valuable strategic assets, but today they are gaining new importance in the geopolitical game. In a situation where the world is looking for alternatives to Chinese and Russian raw material dominance, Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal in his articles for Politico offered the European Union cooperation in the extraction of critical resources. He stated that the EU cannot survive without Ukraine, because Russia has already started a war against the European Union.
“That is why Ukraine’s accession to the EU is not only a moral obligation, but also a strategic step, first of all necessary for the European Union itself. This is a move that will strengthen its eastern flank militarily and strengthen its geopolitical position around the world.
We are not one of those who ask to join the EU just for the sake of funding or preferences. We know our price and we honestly talk about it with our partners. We are already the basis of Europe’s security.” Shmyhal emphasized.
Despite the fact that we have not been accepted into the European Union for many years, in his opinion, the reconstruction of Ukraine as its future member will contribute to the economic strengthening of Europe. That is, the extraction of strategically important resources, such as lithium, titanium and uranium, will be beneficial to both the European Union and Ukraine, as it will contribute to the creation of new enterprises and jobs.
According to him, the recovery of the country will become an important driver of the European economy. We are talking about large-scale investments worth hundreds of billions of euros, which will stimulate the development of production both in Ukraine and in EU member states. In addition, Shmyhal emphasized that Ukraine, having 22 out of 30 minerals that are critically important for Europe, can become a key supplier of strategic resources for the region. Lithium, titanium, uranium – these elements play a key role in modern technologies, the defense industry and the energy sector. For the EU, such an initiative means an opportunity to reduce dependence on authoritarian regimes, while for Ukraine it is a chance to become an important economic player and attract billions of investments.
Shmyhal justified his proposal by the fact that Ukraine has all the prerequisites for the development of mineral extraction. The country ranks first in Europe in terms of uranium reserves, making it a potential supplier of raw materials for the EU’s growing nuclear power industry. Only 10% of explored titanium deposits are currently being developed, which opens up significant opportunities for increasing exports, especially in the context of sanctions against Russia, which until now provided a significant share of the needs of the European market. Ukrainian lithium, as a key component in the production of batteries for electric vehicles, can become a decisive factor in Europe’s green transition. Given that the demand for this metal may grow 13 times by 2030, Ukraine is quite capable of occupying one of the central places in the global supply chain.
US efforts to gain access to Ukrainian resources
At the same time, US President Donald Trump said that Kyiv should compensate Washington’s support in the amount of 500 billion dollars, and do it at the expense of access to Ukrainian natural resources. To consolidate this demand, US Finance Minister Scott Bessent arrived in Kyiv and held talks with Volodymyr Zelenskyi on February 12. He brought a draft agreement on economic partnership, the key part of which is the joint development of Ukrainian minerals. At the moment, Ukraine has completed finalization of the draft partnership memorandum and handed it over to the USA. The American side took a break for a detailed analysis of the document.
Despite the fact that the details of the agreement are not officially disclosed, Bessent made it clear that Washington expects to receive a share of the profits from the extraction of certain Ukrainian resources. At the same time, the agreement is presented as a strategic agreement that will supposedly provide Ukraine with a “security shield” after the end of the war with Russia. According to the American minister, this should be a signal to Moscow about the strong alliance between Ukraine and the USA, as well as the presence in Ukraine of assets belonging to American companies and government structures. This, according to Bessent, will be a long-term deterrent against further Russian invasions.
Another important point is that financing for Ukraine must now be carried out with a “new level of transparency” introduced by the Trump administration. This may mean tighter control over where exactly funds are directed, and at the same time – economic levers of influence on Kyiv. Washington openly talks about its desire to further “interweave” the Ukrainian and American economies, which actually makes Ukraine dependent on new financial agreements.
This agreement, which Bessent calls “Trump’s first step in restoring peace between Ukraine and Russia”, can become not just a financial agreement, but also a tool of political control. The question is how favorable the conditions will be for Kyiv, and whether Ukraine risks gradually losing its economic independence by giving away strategic resources in exchange for support that was previously provided without conditions.
Ukraine is in the arena of geo-economic struggle for natural resources
As we can see, Ukraine is rapidly turning into an arena of geo-economic struggle for its natural wealth. Recent events indicate that minerals are becoming the main argument in negotiations with international partners, and not just an economic asset of the country. The US and the EU have already openly demonstrated their desire to secure access to Ukrainian strategic resources, and this is happening at a critical moment when Kyiv is most in need of military and financial support.
Trump’s proposal that Ukraine “essentially agree” to give the US access to $500 billion worth of rare earth metals in return for military aid that Washington has provided to Kiev clearly shows a shift in American strategy. Previously, aid was provided without such requirements, but now Washington insists on receiving economic guarantees in the form of access to lithium, titanium and uranium mining. This is a sign that Ukraine is increasingly viewed not as a partner, but as a resource base.
The European Union acts more softly, but its interests are also clear. Ukraine’s declared readiness for joint ventures in the extraction of critical minerals did not arise out of nowhere. It is clear that this issue has been repeatedly discussed between the parties. However, it has the potential both for attracting investment and for Ukraine to lose control over its strategic assets. However, if the rules of the game are not clearly defined, Kyiv risks repeating the fate of many countries that have rich subsoil, but remain economically dependent.
In this situation, the key issue is the terms of cooperation. If Ukraine can build a system under which the extraction of resources will not simply be transferred to the disposal of foreign companies, but will bring long-term profits and the development of its own industry, this situation can be profitable. However, the current agreements are more like the creation of a new form of external control over the Ukrainian subsoil.
Ukraine has resources for which world economies are ready to fight, and rare earth metals are one of the most critical assets. These elements have become not just raw materials for high-tech production, but real strategic weapons. Without them, it is impossible to imagine the modern defense, aviation, energy and digital industries. Lithium is key for batteries, titanium for aerospace, holmium for nuclear power, and neodymium for hard drives and electric motors. The world’s dependence on these resources is growing, and with it – the struggle for control over them.
It should be noted that the world market of rare earth metals is supported by several suppliers. China controls 68% of production, the United States occupies 12%, Australia – 5%. Other countries, including Vietnam, Brazil, India and Ukraine, have significant deposits, but their influence is limited by the complexity and cost of the extraction process. The geopolitical war for these resources has been going on for a long time between Beijing and Washington. China is using its mining dominance as political leverage by imposing export restrictions on strategic raw materials. The US is trying to get out of this dependence, so Trump’s offer to get access to Ukrainian minerals is not just an economic deal, but part of a global confrontation.
Ukraine can play a key role in this game, because its subsoil is estimated at 15-26 trillion dollars, a large part of which is in rare earths and rare metals. At the same time, most deposits are concentrated in the Donetsk, Luhansk and Dnipropetrovsk regions, which makes them critically important for both the economy and security. However, one-third of these resources today are located in occupied territories or war zones, which makes their use much more difficult. Lithium, titanium ores, nickel, cobalt – these resources are strategically important not only for Ukraine, but also for foreign countries.
The war showed that control of minerals is just as important as control of military bases or infrastructure. Russia has seized territories rich in energy resources and metals, which gives it economic leverage on the world market. If the West seeks to reduce its dependence on Russia and China, Ukraine becomes a critical player. Washington and Brussels cannot ignore the fact that Ukraine has a significant stock of metals needed for the defense and high-tech industries.
The big question is who will get access to these resources and under what conditions? Attempts to attract foreign partners can lead to an economic breakthrough or to a new form of external control. The US offers financing in exchange for access to mining, the EU is also interested in joint ventures. But the problem is that the authorities of Ukraine do not have a detailed plan on how exactly to regulate this sphere, because it is extremely expensive. In many countries that have become suppliers of strategic raw materials for large powers, the development of their own economy turned out to be secondary – resources were exported in raw form, and profits went not to local communities, but to international corporations.
What do Ukrainian statistics hide? Data on reserves of many rare earth metals remain classified. As far back as 2005, information about lithium deposits was closed, which makes you wonder: how big are the real reserves, if they are subject to this level of secrecy? Similar data are not disclosed about zirconium, beryllium, scandium and other metals that may be of critical importance for the military-industrial complex. At the same time, Ukraine has already proven that it is capable of being not only a supplier of raw materials, but also a technological player. Suffice it to mention the growing sector of the production of drones and defense technology. But if a clear strategy for the extraction and use of strategic resources is not created, the country risks turning into another raw material colony for geopolitical giants.
At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the risks of such a partnership in mining. Many countries that have significant natural resources have not been able to use them to their advantage. The experience of Africa and Latin America shows that without appropriate public policies, the extraction of critical minerals often becomes a trap: foreign companies export raw materials, while local populations do not benefit, and the economy remains dependent on the export of unprocessed products. In the case of Ukraine, the key issue is the model of cooperation. If the agreement with the EU is limited to giving European companies access to resources, the country risks receiving minimal benefits, limited to the creation of a few jobs in the extractive sector.
To avoid such a scenario, Ukraine needs to insist on deeper integration into production chains. The opening of joint ventures should be accompanied by investments in processing and creation of products with added value. If the EU is interested in strategic autonomy, it should support not only mining, but also the development of processing capacities in Ukraine. This will allow not only to gain access to raw materials, but also to create long-term economic synergy between Ukrainian and European industry.
Another important aspect is the issue of ecology. The mining of lithium, titanium and uranium is accompanied by a significant impact on the environment, especially if the control of environmental standards is weak. European countries, which claim the role of world leaders in matters of environmental sustainability, cannot afford to ignore this factor. Any cooperation should include clear commitments on environmental protection, land reclamation and prevention of man-made disasters.
So, the world has once again entered an era where wars are fought not only for territories, but also for resources that will determine the economic and technological future of states. Ukraine has found itself at the very center of this global struggle, where control over minerals is becoming as much a strategic asset as military might or diplomatic alliances. The war for the Ukrainian subsoil is taking place not only on the battlefield, but also in backroom negotiations between Washington, Brussels, Beijing and other players who consider our country as a new raw material base for their geopolitical interests.
Ukraine has riches that can become the foundation for its economic revival, but at the same time these resources are turned into a bargaining chip in the great game of the world’s powers. And while the world’s capitals are competing for control over minerals, the key question for our country is whether it will be able to use this interest as a lever to strengthen its own independence or risk becoming another raw material appendage for stronger states.
The price of a mistake can be too high. If the government does not develop an effective strategy that will allow not only to extract, but also to process its resources, creating added value and a technological advantage, then the country risks losing this chance and forever securing for itself the status of a supplier of raw materials for foreign economies.
