Ukraine and the United States are set to sign a landmark minerals agreement, marking a significant step toward strengthening economic ties between the two nations. However, security experts tell VOA that concerns persist about the broader implications of the deal.

Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers approved the agreement Wednesday and U.S. President Donald Trump confirmed that Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy will visit the White House on Friday to sign it.

The deal includes provisions for the co-ownership and management of a post-war reconstruction fund for Ukraine, to which Ukraine will allocate 50% of future revenues from the country’s natural resources.

The agreement states that the U.S. will maintain a “long-term financial commitment to the development of a stable and economically prosperous Ukraine.”

The deal makes no direct reference to efforts to end Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, though, or about future security arrangements for the Eastern European country, apart from a single line: “The Government of the United States of America supports Ukraine’s efforts to obtain security guarantees needed to establish lasting peace.”

While the deal aims to unlock Ukraine’s mineral wealth and bolster its economic recovery, security experts warn it may fall short in addressing Ukraine’s ongoing security challenges amid continued Russian aggression.

American business perspective

Andy Hunder, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine, explained to VOA by telephone that the deal aims to establish a new American-Ukrainian fund, focusing on state-owned enterprises and Ukraine’s rich subsoil resources, including gas, oil, and critical minerals.

A representative of American business in Ukraine, Hunder expressed optimism about the agreement’s potential impact: “We’re excited. Professional fund managers can turn these enterprises profitable very quickly. This is a win-win for both Ukrainian and American taxpayers,” he told VOA on Wednesday.

Hunder said the fund could unlock profits rapidly by introducing professional management to Ukraine’s state-owned enterprises, which currently face mismanagement issues.

“Ukraine has the second highest number of state-owned enterprises in the world, many of which are being managed, or some are being mismanaged, by the Ukrainian state. So, I think we get new professional fund managers into these entities, and this is where you could seal profits and turn them around very, very quickly,” he said.

Hunder revealed that discussions about Ukrainian economic potential were high on the agenda between the two countries in 2024, “[s]tarting when Senator Lindsey Graham came in March and May of 2024, and we have looked into this, and we see opportunity.”

“To take advantage of this opportunity, the war must end, and this deal, in his view, is a step toward a peaceful solution. I think this is really what the new administration under President Trump is focusing on — finding ways to stop the killing of Ukrainians by the Russians. We do expect a ceasefire this year, in 2025, and now is the time when Ukraine will present the biggest opportunity, the largest recovery, and the reconstruction of a nation in Europe since World War II,” he said to VOA.

Roman Opimakh, former general director of the Ukrainian Geological Survey. agrees the deal could benefit both countries.

It will help the U.S. to diversify its rare metal supply and “decrease dependence on China,” he said. For Ukraine, he said, the deal could enable post-war re-industrialization and economic growth. We can renew the industrial potential of our country and actually increase the role of Ukraine globally,” Opimakh said by phone.

While the deal indicates strong U.S. interest in Ukraine’s economic future, security experts caution that it is not a comprehensive solution to Ukraine’s security challenges.

Former defense minister Andriy Zagorodnyuk, now the chairman of the Center for Defense Strategies in Ukraine, told VOA in a phone call the deal has broader implications: “The U.S. framed this deal as a demonstration of vested interest in Ukraine, signaling support for Ukrainian stability. Investments of this scale serve as anchor investments, potentially attracting more resources to Ukraine’s economy.”

Zagorodnyuk cautioned that economic ties are “not enough” to guarantee Ukrainian sovereignty in the face of Russian aggression. To deter future attacks, Ukraine needs military power — either on its own or in partnership with NATO and European allies, he stated to VOA.

“We recognize that Russia might be attempting to manipulate the situation and convey to Trump’s administration that even if they continue their aggression for any reason, they would still respect American interests or something like that,” he said.

Asked by VOA what Ukraine needs from the U.S. for long-term security, Zagorodnyuk said ideally, the country would have NATO. However, “if NATO isn’t an option, there should be a package that enables Ukraine to defend against aggression. This package must be robust, and that strength needs to be clear to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin,” he said.

Agreement details

According to VOA sources, who cannot be named because they are not authorized to speak about the matter, negotiations concerning the details of the deal continued right up to the Cabinet ministers’ meeting late Wednesday afternoon, Kyiv time.

According to news reports, Ukraine negotiated more favorable terms than the U.S. originally proposed, bringing down an initial U.S. demand for a $500 billion claim on its natural resources.

The deal does not include explicit U.S. security guarantees, which Kyiv had originally sought. The U.S. will maintain decision-making authority within the fund under its own legal framework, with ownership terms to be defined in later agreements.

Geopolitical ramifications

Despite praising the agreement as a step toward strengthening Ukraine’s economy, Trump sparked controversy recently by labeling Zelenskyy a “dictator” without elections and pressuring him to finalize the deal quickly. The U.S. administration has described the deal as a way for the U.S. to recover tens of billions of dollars in military aid sent to Ukraine.

The question remains whether this economic partnership also can foster lasting peace and stability in Ukraine.