The statements made by the President of the United States of America (USA), Donald Trump, on April 18, 2025, questioning the mediation role in the Russia-Ukraine War and threatening to “withdraw” if rapid progress is not made, directly affect the mineral agreement negotiations between Ukraine and the US[1]. Only one memorandum of intent has been signed between Ukraine and the US, and an absolute and binding investment agreement has not yet been implemented.[2] This shows that the process is progressing on fragile ground.
Trump’s statements create uncertainty that threatens not only Ukraine’s hopes for post-war recovery but also the US’s own economic and geopolitical goals. Because Ukraine’s mineral resources are considered a counterweight to China’s global mineral hegemony, not only for Kyiv but also for Washington, in this context, Trump’s potential withdrawal from mediation directly risks completing the mineral agreement.
The Ukrainian government’s aim in signing the minerals agreement with the US is to support economic development and more strongly connect the US to the security and political support process. As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated in his statement to European leaders in March 2025, “a ceasefire agreement without security guarantees is hazardous for Ukraine,” clearly demonstrates the strategic motivation behind the minerals agreement. In other words, the minerals agreement is an investment project for Ukraine and a security and political protection mechanism.
Trump’s harsh stance against Chinese investments in Africa is noteworthy, given his past criticisms of minerals in the Congo.[3] Trump has criticized China’s dominance of rare minerals in the Congo in terms of international law and justice norms and has frequently brought up the issue during his election campaigns. In this context, the US withdrawal from Ukraine would not only leave Kyiv defenseless. Still, it could also lead to Washington losing its strategic and ethical position vis-à-vis China.
On the other hand, the US withdrawal from the peace process will create new opportunities for China and Russia. China’s current leadership in the global production of rare earth minerals and direct access to potential reserves in Ukraine could further strengthen Beijing’s global hegemony in the energy transition and high-technology fields. Russia could use the US withdrawal from the region to increase military and political pressure on Kyiv. In such a scenario, Ukraine’s economic and military resilience could be seriously weakened.
It is observed that the Trump administration’s strategy towards Ukraine prioritizes economic interests and pushes security policies into the background. This approach risks the US’s influence in Ukraine and its leadership role in the Western alliance in general. Indeed, the US’s distancing from Ukraine could create distrust among its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies and leave Europe in a more vulnerable position against Russia.
If the minerals deal fails, Ukraine and the United States will face a serious disadvantage in global economic competition. Today, critical minerals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt are increasingly essential in worldwide energy and high-tech markets, and these resources are considered essential raw materials in strategic sectors such as energy transformation, electric vehicle production, battery technologies, and the defense industry.
The possibility that Russia and China will coordinate in this process should also be considered. The goals of both countries, which are to weaken the Western alliance through Ukraine and to expand their own economic and political influence, seem parallel. Therefore, the geopolitical vacuum created in the event of the US withdrawal from Ukraine could pave the way for Russia’s military advances and China’s economic expansion. This possibility would mean that Ukraine’s security and the security of all of Europe would be under threat.
While Ukraine’s solidarity with European countries is essential, it does not seem possible for Europe alone to meet Ukraine’s economic and military needs in the long term. Therefore, the US’s withdrawal could weaken Ukraine’s position in the Western bloc. In such a scenario, it would be tough for Ukraine to achieve its long-term economic recovery and political independence goals.
As a result, if the US withdraws from the mediation process, it is anticipated that Ukraine’s economic and geopolitical gains from its mineral resources will be significantly weakened. Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction and economic recovery processes may slow down, and the country’s capacity to attract foreign investment may seriously decline. Ukraine, which loses US support, may become more open to Russia’s military and political pressure, which may also negatively affect European security balances. It seems highly likely that China will rapidly fill the vacated investment and influence area and indirectly increase Ukraine’s control over strategic minerals. In addition, the West’s access to critical raw material resources for energy transformation and advanced technology strategies may become difficult, which may erode the global competitiveness of the US and Europe in the long term. Ukraine’s hopes for full integration with the West may be weakened, and the country may become a frozen conflict zone and be pushed into a geopolitically fragile buffer state position.
[1] “Trump says US will ‘pass’ on Ukraine peace talks if no progress soon”, BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20x5xn1g92o, (Date Accession: 19.04.2025).
[2] “What we know about US-Ukraine minerals deal”, BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-65288255, (Date Accession: 19.04.2025).
[3] “Zhao Ziwen, “US Lawmakers Urged to Stop China’s Critical Minerals Exploitation in DR Congo”, South China Morning Post, https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3303889/us-lawmakers-urged-stop-chinas-critical-minerals-exploitation-dr-congo, (Date Accession: 26.03.2025).
