The future underground: international media on subsoil, war and Ukraine’s new agreement with the US
The agreement between Ukraine and the USA on natural resources, signed on May 1 in Washington, caused a significant response in the international media: it was already called “historic”, “mutually beneficial”, and at the same time “controversial”. Some speak of a new stage of strategic partnership, while others speak of a pragmatic attempt by Washington to offset the costs of the war. For Ukraine, this document has become a test of diplomatic endurance: after months of pressure, tough negotiations and fears about the loss of sovereignty, Kyiv managed to conclude an agreement that is already being assessed as more balanced than previous options. We collected key assessments of the world’s leading media — from The Guardian to The Economist — to understand exactly what Kyiv and Washington signed, what the opportunities of this agreement are, and where the risks and pitfalls are.
BBC: Has Trump made concessions?
Air Force does its seven conclusions on the Minerals Agreement.
- Ukraine should not return the US “debt”.
Despite Donald Trump’s repeated statements that Kyiv allegedly owes Washington $350 billion in aid, the text of the agreement itself does not mention any obligations to return funds. The Prime Minister of Ukraine Denys Shmyhal confirmed that no “debt compensation” is foreseen.
- Tougher US rhetoric towards Russia
Despite the fact that the Trump administration usually chooses cautious wording with regard to the Kremlin, this time Washington’s position has become much more decisive. The text of the agreement includes the term “full-scale invasion of Russia”, and the US Treasury emphasizes that no one who financed or supported the Russian military machine will receive any benefits from the post-war reconstruction of Ukraine.
- The agreement covers not only minerals but also oil and gas
Although discussions surrounding the agreement focused on deposits of lithium, titanium and other rare earth metals, the document also envisages cooperation in the field of oil, gas and other hydrocarbons. Formally, the resources remain the property of Ukraine, but the USA receives the right to joint development.
This is an innovation: energy carriers were not mentioned in previous versions of the agreement. Such a step on the part of Kyiv is considered flexibility, dictated by the desire to end hostilities as soon as possible.
- No obstacles to Ukraine’s accession to the EU
A separate block of the agreement concerns Ukraine’s European integration aspirations. The text states that the US respects Kyiv’s intention to become a member of the European Union, and that the agreement should not harm it. If new requirements appear during negotiations with Brussels, the States agree to hold consultations on changes to the agreement.
What’s more, the document talks about US assistance in attracting not only American, but also European investments.
- The agreement opens the door for new military aid
Official Washington presented the signing of the agreement as a prerequisite for the further provision of defense support to Ukraine. In particular, the supply of air defense systems is mentioned. This is quite unexpected given that Trump, upon returning to the White House, has previously signaled a desire to cut military aid.
However, the document does not contain any specific security guarantees that Kyiv and its European allies have been seeking for a long time. This leaves room for political maneuvering on the part of Washington.
- The US can withdraw from the agreement at any time
Formally, the agreement does not contain strict obligations that would deter the USA from refusing to support Ukraine. Unlike Joe Biden’s policy, Trump’s current course is based not on security guarantees, but on economic partnership. This makes US support strong, but not guaranteed.
- Investment fund profits can remain in Ukraine for 10 years
According to Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyridenko, during the first ten years after the launch of the investment fund, all profits will be reinvested in the Ukrainian economy — in reconstruction or new projects. However, this condition is not spelled out in the main document, but stated as a possible point of the future technical agreement.
After the ten-year term, the profits can be distributed among the partners. In Washington, this step is called a “symbolic return” of funds to American taxpayers who financed support for Ukraine.
CNN: The deal is no longer as one-sided in favor of the US as it was
CNN provides a more detailed context of the negotiations and emphasizes the conflict that accompanied the process. According to the channel, the parties have been negotiating since January, when Donald Trump returned to the White House. The final document, although less one-sided than previous versions, provides that future US military aid will be counted as a contribution to an investment fund created to rebuild Ukraine.
CNN also emphasizes that the agreement arose after “bitter disputes” that even temporarily blocked American aid to Kyiv. President Trump explained the signing by the fact that he “didn’t want to look like a fool” and sought to “protect the contribution” of the United States to the war. The position of the Ukrainian side is indicative: Economy Minister Yuliya Svyridenko stated that the resources remain the property of the state, and the signed agreement does not provide for concessions in matters of sovereignty.
At the same time, CNN notes that a few months ago, the Ukrainian delegation considered the previous version of the document to be the kind that forces “selling the country.” The final agreement in Kyiv is called an equal instrument of investment cooperation. However, according to the materials of the TV channel, the very presence of American companies and money in the strategic industries of Ukraine should, in the opinion of official Kyiv, become an indirect guarantee of security.
The Guardian: cautious optimism prevails in Kyiv
Edition emphasizes: Kyiv welcomed the signing of the long-discussed agreement between Ukraine and the US on mineral resources with cautious optimism. Although some details still need to be finalized, Ukrainian analysts believe that the deal has turned out to be more beneficial for Ukraine than expected, especially given Donald Trump’s statements that Ukraine has no trump cards in the negotiations.
An important condition of the agreement was that Ukraine retains full control over its subsoil and natural resources. At the same time, after long negotiations, the final text of the agreement does not include the demand for the return of previous US military aid, which Trump had insisted on earlier. Additionally, the agreement clearly states that cooperation with the US will not affect Ukraine’s potential integration with the European Union, and does not subject Ukraine to US jurisdiction. American companies will get access to tender procedures only on fair terms, and this does not mean that all investments or projects should go only through the United States.
The initial versions of the deal proposed by Trump caused outrage because of their one-sided terms. Now, after many revisions and revisions, the signed agreement is a compromise between US economic interests and Ukraine’s desire to preserve its sovereignty and economic independence. The final approval of the agreement still requires ratification by the Ukrainian parliament, as well as the signing of the technical details of the agreement. However, it is already an important step that can strengthen Washington’s support for Ukraine, despite the fact that the main decisions on the war front are left to other factors.
The New York Times: all natural resources, as before, will be considered the property of Ukraine
The New York Times emphasizes the strategic dimension of the agreement, noting that the US seeks to strengthen its economic presence in Ukraine, particularly in the field of critical minerals. The newspaper also points to the new rhetoric of the Trump administration, which shows a readiness for mutually beneficial agreements, despite previous isolationist tendencies.
The publication informs readers about mineral deposits in Ukraine. Ukraine has significant reserves of critical minerals, including titanium deposits, lithium, uranium, manganese, zirconium, graphite and rare earth elements. According to the Kyiv School of Economics, the country controls more than 100 such deposits and also has limited reserves of oil and natural gas.
Titanium, used in construction, aviation and medical implants, is one of the main resources, the extraction of which accounts for about 6% of the world production. Ukraine also has Europe’s largest reserves of uranium, which is important for nuclear power. Lithium, a key element for batteries, particularly for electric vehicles, is also a strategic resource, with Ukraine holding a third of Europe’s reserves, although some of these deposits are located in war zones.
In addition, Ukraine has large reserves of rare earth elements used in electronics and green energy, as well as manganese, which is needed for steel smelting, and zirconium, which is used in the ceramic industry and nuclear power. Graphite, in turn, is an important component for the production of steel and electric motors.
The Economist: the deal as a test of political loyalty
After months of difficult negotiations, Ukraine and the US reached an agreement on minerals, which was the result of numerous disputes and political vicissitudes, – writes edition. Originally proposed by the Ukrainian side as an agreement to exchange mineral rights for more arms supplies, it turned into a political test of loyalty to Donald Trump. The agreements signed by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyridenko provide for the creation of an investment fund that will work on parity terms — with joint management and profit sharing.
The war and unstable situation in the country make full implementation of the agreement unclear. However, it is an important political gesture that underscores the diplomatic success of Ukraine, which resisted excessive US demands, including repayment of past military aid and control of 100% of profits. The agreement concerns future natural resources and infrastructure projects to be chosen by Ukraine.
For Ukraine, the agreement also opens up prospects for further military support, and for Trump — a chance to demonstrate achievements that correspond to the interests of his political base. Although it is unclear at this stage whether the agreement will bring real security guarantees or additional aid, the Ukrainian side hopes that it will be a step towards greater concessions from the US and a resolution of the conflict with Russia.
