The Ukrainian subsoil deal has worked: the United States is beginning to invest money in the extraction of critical minerals

The US-Ukrainian agreement on natural resources has entered the practical phase. The mutual fund concluded the first deal in the field critical minerals by approximately $30 million, and the total volume of new approved projects already exceeds $60 million.

Briefly about the main thing

• a joint US-Ukrainian fund launched its first investment directly in the critical minerals sector;
• The volume of the transaction with BGV Group is estimated at approximately $30 million;
• Among the priorities are rare earth elements, uranium, beryllium and zirconium;
• official Kyiv calls the fund an equal restoration mechanism;
• Donald Trump publicly presented the agreement as a way to return to the United States some of the funds spent on Ukraine;
• Some of the Ukrainian opposition criticized the opacity of the accompanying documents and possible long-term concessions to the United States.

The first real deal on Ukrainian minerals

Joint US-Ukrainian Recovery Investment Fund URIF concluded the first deal in the critical minerals sector. According to Reuters, we are talking about $30 million and cooperation with the Ukrainian BGV Group Management.

In parallel, the fund approved several more projects in energy and technology. Ministry of Economy of Ukraine reports that URIF’s own investments in the new package will exceed $60 million.

Priority projects include rare earth elements, uranium, beryllium and zirconium – resources that the United States considers critical for the energy, electronics, aviation and defense industries.

Official version of Kyiv: joint restoration fund

From the moment the agreement was signed, the Ukrainian authorities presented it as equal partnership 50/50. Kyiv argues that the state retains ownership and control over the subsoil, and the fund must finance projects exclusively on Ukrainian territory.

The starting capital was formed equally: according to $75 million from the USA and Ukraine. In the future, the fund should be replenished, including from a portion of future royalties from new projects for the extraction of natural resources.

Athens News analyzed the history of the agreement in detail in the material “Rare earths worth $500 billion for the US…”.

Trump’s version: return American money

Donald Trump’s public rhetoric differed markedly from the official Ukrainian formula.

Even during the negotiations, he repeatedly said that the agreement should provide the American taxpayer with economic compensation for previously provided assistance to Ukraine. Reuters in February 2025 reported on an early version of the negotiations, which discussed sending 50% of the income to the fund, up to much larger amounts, although the final terms subsequently changed.

The American DFC now also directly emphasizes that the fund should not only restore Ukraine, but also Strengthen US supply chains for strategic raw materials and provide U.S. capabilities for future product selection.

Ukrainian opposition: too much remains behind closed doors

The third interpretation of the deal was heard within Ukraine itself. Some opposition deputies criticized the ratification process for the fact that parliament practically did not participate in the negotiations, and a significant part of the accompanying commercial documents was not fully published.

Radio Liberty After the vote, the Verkhovna Rada directly noted the deputies’ complaints about the opacity of certain parts of the agreement and the discussion of the so-called “secret points.”

Therefore, among critics of the deal, a much harsher interpretation has emerged: Ukraine retains formal ownership of the subsoil, but is gradually providing American capital with privileged access to their development and future products.

Now the dispute can be tested in practice

So far, much of the discussion surrounding the agreement has been political. Kyiv spoke about restoration, Trump spoke about the return of American money, and the opposition spoke about the risk of excessive concessions.

Now there are specific deposits, specific investors and real financial conditions.

Athens News has already shown how this might look in practice, using the example of the Dobraya lithium site. In January, we examined the conditions of the first raw materials project, where Ukraine’s share after compensation for the investor’s costs could turn out to be very limited: “Less than 2% for Ukraine: how the “commodity deal” started”.

Why does the US need Ukrainian minerals at all?

Washington is trying to reduce its dependence on China, which still controls much of the world’s rare earth processing capacity.

“Athens News” discussed this problem in detail in the material “How Beijing Maintains Control of Rare Earth Metals”.

Therefore, Ukrainian deposits are of interest to the United States not only as an investment in the restoration of the country, but also as a potential part of an alternative raw material chain to China.

Source link