Landmark deal ties US aid to Ukraine's critical mineral wealth.

A national race to restore domestic critical mineral supply chains and break dependence on Chinese-controlled resources has defined the industrial and geopolitical landscape. Yet, one of the most unexpected and consequential developments came in 2025, when the United States and Ukraine finalized an agreement linking future assistance to mineral development, creating economic interests that strengthened security in ways no military commitment could.

In the winter of 2022, Russian forces crossed into Ukraine in a full-scale invasion that began with missile strikes on Kyiv and other major cities, followed by ground offensives that pushed deep into Ukrainian territory – an attack that marked the beginning of a war that leveled towns, displaced millions, and left a nation fighting to survive.

With his return to the White House in 2025, Donald Trump moved quickly to pursue a more direct resolution to the war, reopening dialogue between the nations for the first time since the conflict began.

While initial discussions engaged both countries in broader efforts to end the fighting, attention gradually turned to how continued U.S. assistance to Ukraine might be structured in relation to the substantial aid already provided, laying the groundwork for what would later become a historic economic agreement.

By the time Trump returned to office, the U.S. had already provided Ukraine with more than $350 billion in military, financial, and humanitarian aid, a scale of support that had drawn growing scrutiny in Washington.

Much of that assistance had been delivered with no structured framework for long-term return or strategic alignment beyond immediate defense and relief.

For a nation grappling with the costs of sustained global commitments, rising debt, and mounting domestic obligations left unresolved – from aging infrastructure to strained social programs – continued open-ended aid became increasingly difficult to justify.

Believed to host substantial reserves of critical materials, Ukraine has remained largely undeveloped due to decades of underinvestment, governance challenges, and, more recently, the disruption caused by war.

This untapped potential became part of discussions about how future assistance might be structured to repay aid already provided.

However, as conversations continued, the focus turned instead to linking assistance to resource development as a way to support Ukraine's reconstruction while advancing shared strategic interests, reflecting a growing recognition that economic investment could help secure outcomes where military aid alone could not.

For the U.S., the evolving dialogue marked a rare alignment of post-war recovery priorities and critical minerals strategy – an approach that would culminate in what became a landmark minerals-for-investment agreement.

Wealth in wartime

Visual Capitalist (via Ukrainian Geological Survey), February 2025.

A February 2025 infographic from Visual Capitalist highlights Ukraine's vast mineral reserves – including classified quantities of lithium, uranium, and titanium – with many deposits located in Russian-occupied territories.

With an estimated 20,000 known mineral deposits and prospects containing 117 different minerals and metals, Ukraine remains one of the most resource-rich nations in Europe. More than 20 minerals and metals found in the war-torn country are classified as critical to modern industry, including rare earth elements, lithium, titanium, and graphite.

According to past reports, Ukraine holds what is believed to be Europe's largest titanium reserves, accounting for as much as 7% of the world's reserves, along with an estimated 500,000 metric tons of lithium and up to 20% of the world's graphite reserves.

Similarly, the Eastern European country is believed to possess significant quantities of rare earths such as neodymium, erbium, and scandium, which support industries ranging from aerospace and defense to renewable energy and high-tech manufacturing.

Divided into 24 oblasts, or provinces, several have become battlegrounds in the war, with the eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk – collectively known as the Donbas – being contested since 2014.

Further south, the oblasts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson – which hold vital infrastructure and industrial assets – have also seen prolonged fighting, with parts of these provinces now occupied by Russian forces.

Much of Ukraine's mineral wealth, however, lies beneath regions that have borne the greatest toll of war, with titanium reserves dispersed across northwestern and central oblasts beyond the immediate reach of fighting.

Distributed more broadly, lithium occurs in central, eastern, and southeastern Ukraine, with two of the most strategically important deposits lying within Russian-occupied territory, constraining Kyiv's access to materials critical for its postwar recovery.

Similarly, graphite – widely distributed across central and western provinces – stands as one of the country's most valuable untapped assets, its potential remaining largely theoretical in the absence of sufficient infrastructure or sustained investment.

Adding to this, though believed to occur in several regions, rare earth elements continue to evade precise quantification due to outdated geological surveys and the persistent barriers posed by conflict and occupation.

Strategically important, nickel, manganese, zirconium, and tantalum add to the breadth of resources that remain largely inaccessible, their development likewise hindered by damage to infrastructure and the absence of modern geological mapping needed to advance mining at scale.

Altogether, these resources form a foundation of mineral wealth that may now begin to see meaningful development under the framework of the newly signed agreement, offering a path to rebuilding a devastated nation through the harnessing of its own untapped potential.

U.S. Department of the Treasury

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukraine's First Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko sign the landmark U.S.-Ukraine natural resources agreement in Washington, April 2025.

Minerals-for-investment deal

Finalized in Washington on April 30, the U.S.-Ukraine minerals agreement marked a pivotal shift in how American support for Ukraine is structured, linking future assistance to the long-term development of Ukraine's natural resource wealth.

Signed by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukrainian First Deputy Prime Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko, the accord established the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund – a limited partnership intended to channel future revenues from mineral, oil, and gas projects into Ukraine's recovery while providing the U.S. with structured opportunities to secure critical raw materials.

Unlike earlier iterations of the deal that drew criticism for being exploitative, the final agreement preserved Ukraine's full control over its subsoil, infrastructure, and natural resources, while providing no debt obligations that could burden an already devastated economy.

Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said Ukraine would retain "full control over subsoil, infrastructure, and natural resources" and that the agreement "does not provide for any debt obligations," according to Kyiv Independent.

Instead, the agreement reflects a balance between safeguarding sovereignty and enabling private and public investment to support reconstruction and industrial renewal.

At the heart of the structure is a model in which Ukraine contributes future resource revenues to the fund, while the U.S. contribution is tied in part to the assessed value of military assistance delivered after the agreement's effective date.

The fund will serve as the principal mechanism for aligning long-term reconstruction finance with critical mineral development, positioning resource wealth as the engine of economic recovery rather than a prize for external control.

To ensure transparency, stability, and alignment with broader strategic objectives, the agreement lays out a framework for how revenues, investment rights, tax treatment, and offtake arrangements are to be handled.

According to The Kyiv Independent, key provisions of the agreement include:

• Establishment of the Fund: The United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund is structured as a limited partnership between the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation and Ukraine's Agency on Support Public-Private Partnership, backed by the full faith and credit of both governments.

• Ukraine's contribution: Ukraine pledges 50% of future revenues from newly developed mineral, oil, and gas projects to the fund, formalized as an irrevocable right to these earnings.

• U.S.'s contribution: The U.S. contribution is credited in part through military assistance provided after the agreement's effective date, with the assessed value of such aid increasing the U.S. partner's capital stake in the fund.

• Ownership and sovereignty: Ukraine retains full ownership and control over its natural resources, infrastructure, and subsoil rights, with the agreement explicitly affirming that no debt obligations arise and no property privatization is required.

• Taxation and tariffs: Revenues, contributions, and distributions related to the fund are exempt from Ukrainian taxes, levies, and duties. The U.S. expects that no tariffs will apply to materials obtained through offtake agreements linked to the partnership.

• Currency convertibility and transfers: Ukraine guarantees the free conversion of hryvnia into dollars and unrestricted transfer of funds related to the partnership's activities, except under defined emergency conditions, in which case Ukraine must consult with the U.S. and provide indemnification for losses.

• Investment opportunity rights: The fund is granted preferred access to investment information and good-faith negotiation rights on mineral, energy, and infrastructure projects, with protections ensuring no third party is offered materially better terms during negotiations.

• Market-based offtake rights: The U.S. partner or its designee may negotiate for offtake on commercial terms, with recipients of licenses and permits prohibited from granting more favorable offtake terms to other parties during the negotiation period.

• Legal supremacy and stability: The agreement ensures that its terms prevail over conflicting Ukrainian laws and that legislative changes do not undermine the partnership's rights and protections.

• Dispute resolution: Disputes are to be resolved through mutual consultation, with no provision for binding arbitration or external adjudication.

• Duration and amendment: The agreement remains in force indefinitely unless terminated by mutual consent, with amendments requiring approval through the internal procedures of both nations.

The structure of the agreement not only reflects a deliberate effort to move beyond open-ended aid, creating a mechanism through which Ukraine's mineral wealth can be harnessed to drive reconstruction, but also provides a framework for securing critical raw materials essential to America's industrial strategy.

By linking resource development to recovery finance and integrating investment protections, offtake rights, and legal assurances into a single operational model, the agreement lays the groundwork for a recovery effort that aligns economic, industrial, and security interests without compromising Ukraine's sovereignty.

Success, however, will depend not only on the legal and financial architecture but on the ability of both governments to implement the agreement amid ongoing security challenges, infrastructure damage, and the complexities of rebuilding a nation at war.

President.gov.ua via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy meets with U.S. President Donald Trump during a 2019 diplomatic session focused on U.S.-Ukraine relations.

Promise to production

While the U.S.-Ukraine minerals agreement represents a landmark in aligning resource development with postwar recovery, its entry into force and operational impact remain contingent on conditions that extend beyond legal ratification or diplomatic formalities.

Following the signing and Ukraine's parliamentary ratification in early May, the agreement awaits final exchange of notes between the two governments confirming the completion of internal procedures required for it to take effect.

That formal exchange, while procedurally straightforward, hinges on broader realities that continue to shape Ukraine's future and the viability of the partnership itself.

Foremost is the ongoing war, which shows little sign of immediate resolution. The frontlines, hardened by years of entrenched positions, continue to shift only marginally despite intermittent offensives, with large swaths of eastern and southern Ukraine remaining under Russian occupation.

Efforts to negotiate a ceasefire or settlement have stalled amid competing demands, security concerns, and the absence of sustained diplomatic momentum capable of overcoming hardened positions on both sides.

Beyond the military stalemate, damage to critical infrastructure – from rail lines and ports to power grids and processing plants – presents an enormous barrier to the development of Ukraine's mineral wealth. The presence of landmines, unexploded ordnance, and ongoing security risks further impede efforts to survey, map, and access key resource areas.

Until conditions on the ground permit reconstruction at scale and reliable security is established across regions vital to mining and industrial activity, the agreement will remain, for now, more promise than reality.

Yet the framework set out by the agreement lays the foundation for what may become one of the most consequential elements of Ukraine's recovery – and one of the most significant steps in the U.S.'s effort to establish secure, long-term sources of critical minerals essential to the safety and prosperity of its people.

By creating a mechanism through which resource development is tied to reconstruction finance, and by structuring access to future production through market-based rights embedded in a legally binding partnership, the agreement provides a model that links economic stability abroad to industrial resilience at home.

For the U.S., the partnership offers the prospect of moving beyond the vulnerabilities that have defined recent decades, in which supply chains for essential minerals have been concentrated in jurisdictions where geopolitical risks and market manipulation threaten national security and economic well-being.

"We made a deal where we get much more in theory than the $350 billion," said President Trump during a phone call on May 1, reflecting on the minerals agreement's potential compared to prior U.S. aid.

As Ukraine's mineral sector moves, over time, from promise to production, and as the agreement's provisions come into force through reconstruction and investment, the framework may ultimately help close gaps in domestic supply chains and reduce reliance on adversarial powers for materials fundamental to defense, energy, and technological leadership.

Bringing the agreement to life, however, will require more than signatures and statutes. It will depend on the resolve of both governments to see it through amid uncertainty, the ability of private industry to engage on terms that balance risk and reward, and the restoration of conditions in Ukraine that allow its mineral wealth to serve not as a contested prize of war, but as the engine of a durable peace and shared prosperity.