Trump wants to make Ukraine a debtor for decades to come: expert assesses new deal on fossil fuels
16 April 14:42
OPINION
The United States softened its demands for Ukraine to return the military aid it received three times during recent negotiations on a bilateral agreement. The Trump administration is now demanding $100 billion from Ukraine instead of $300 billion.
At the same time, the United States continues to push for a deal that would allow it to receive a share of the profits from future Ukrainian investment projects, including mining and infrastructure development. Washington sees this as compensation for the multibillion-dollar military and other assistance provided to Ukraine under the Joe Biden administration.
According to the draft agreement, the United States gets the first right to profits that will go to a special investment fund under Washington’s control. The Ukrainian side, however, is seeking better terms and categorically refuses to recognize previous American aid as debt.
One of the main questions that Ukrainians are asking themselves today in the context of this agreement is why we need it at all After all, if it does not provide any security guarantees, then its only function is to recognize the funds we received from the Biden administration as a debt. Komersant ukrainskyi asked this question to political scientist Volodymyr Fesenko.
The idea was interesting…
The political analyst recalls that the idea was authored by the Ukrainian side, and the idea was to make the United States a closer partner of Ukraine. But “something went wrong”.
“The idea was interesting – to involve the United States as a partner and investor in Ukraine’s post-war development and, in addition, to receive a security guarantee. But Trump has twisted everything and now he wants to make us a debtor through this agreement,”
– the expert comments exclusively for .
We are talking about a debt hole for decades, the political scientist notes, and this is the problem. From a tool for strengthening and developing strategic partnership, the agreement has turned into a challenge and a serious problem for Ukraine.
Читайте нас у Telegram: головні новини коротко
Is the subsoil agreement related to the “peace” negotiations?
Fesenko argues that there is a connection between these two tracks-the subsoil deal and the “peace” talks-but it is indirect. The point is that the Americans are using the negotiations around this agreement as an instrument of additional pressure on Ukraine.
“Since we are dependent on the United States for weapons supplies, information, etc., we are forced to seek a compromise with them. This includes the issue of this agreement,”
– says the political scientist.
It turns out that the Trump administration has successfully combined both tracks and thus created double pressure on Ukraine: both in terms of the agreement itself and in terms of negotiations to end the war.
Red lines
It is very important for Ukraine to find compromises with the United States on this agreement, but they must be real compromises, the expert says. There are things that Ukraine should not do in any case.
“We are talking about not recognizing the aid we received from the United States in the first three years of the war as a debt. This is unacceptable for us. This is a very dangerous precedent. And in relations with some of our other partners. And this is exactly what the US is demanding,”
– emphasizes Fesenko.
But this is exactly the key idea of Trump, the expert emphasizes.
“In addition, there are norms that shake our external economic sovereignty and can create obstacles to Ukraine’s European integration.”
– fesenko adds, referring to the provision on the US imperative to develop any subsoil and the priority of concluding agreements on subsoil.
Therefore, the agreement will be signed only if the parties manage to find compromises on these issues, the political scientist believes:
“So, we cannot say ‘no’ to the Americans in connection with this agreement, but we cannot say ‘yes’ to the text of the agreement at the moment. We need to look for flexible options for compromise around the text of this agreement. So the question is open.”
The fact that negotiations on the deal are ongoing is good, the expert says. This means that the Americans are ready to look for compromise options. But this is where the positive ends.
“Unfortunately, their attitude to this agreement is not a partnership. It is pressure. Pressure and attempts to get unilateral benefits from the agreement, ignoring our positions and interests. This is the main problem,”
– summarizes Volodymyr Fesenko.
Draft agreement between Ukraine and the United States: what is known
In February 2025, the United States and Ukraine reached a preliminary agreement aimed at jointly developing and managing Ukraine’s mineral resources. The agreement, known as the Bilateral Agreement Establishing Conditions for the Reconstruction Investment Fund, provides for the establishment of a joint investment fund to rebuild Ukraine’s war-ravaged economy. The main objective of the fund is to attract and reinvest revenues from Ukraine’s substantial mineral wealth to contribute to its recovery and long-term stability.
Key provisions of the draft agreement
Establishment of the Reconstruction Investment Fund. According to the text of the draft agreement published by The Kyiv Independent, the fund will be jointly owned and managed by the governments of the United States and Ukraine. The ownership and financial interests of each party will be defined in a subsequent agreement on the fund. The fund will be managed by representatives of both governments, and more detailed terms will be set out in a subsequent agreement.
Ukraine’s contribution. Ukraine commits to allocate 50% of its future revenues from the monetization of its natural resources, including minerals, hydrocarbons, oil, natural gas and other extractive infrastructure, to the Reconstruction Investment Fund. These contributions will continue until the amount reaches USD 500 billion (as was the case in previous drafts). It is important to note that current sources of revenue that are already included in the general budget of Ukraine are not covered by this agreement.
The role of the United States. The U.S. government is committed to maintaining a long-term financial commitment aimed at developing a stable and economically prosperous Ukraine. This includes investments, financial instruments, and other tangible and intangible assets critical to Ukraine’s recovery. However, the agreement does not include specific security guarantees or continued arms transfers to Ukraine; these issues will be negotiated separately.
Provisions of the agreement as seen by MP Zheleznyak
MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak said that he had seen the text of the agreement and was horrified by it.
The MP described in detail the key points of the draft that cause concern:
Yaroslav Zheleznyak, MP
- Management by 5 people, 3 of them from the United States with full veto power.
- We are already talking about all minerals. That is, there is oil and gas, both new and existing.
- All over the territory of Ukraine.
- We are talking about production by both state and private companies.
- The money is converted immediately into foreign currency.
- The fund’s money is withdrawn abroad. If for some reason something is not received on our part, we pay extra.
- The U.S. contribution is the assistance we have already received since 2022. And they can make a profit at their own discretion. And they receive the first (and then Ukraine) 4% of the “royalties” from the Fund.
- The agreement is valid indefinitely. It can be changed or terminated only with the permission of the Americans.
- “First night” rights for all new infrastructure projects and the right to veto the sale of resources to other countries.
- Nothing about security guarantees. Not even a hint.
Meanwhile, the government assures that the agreementdoes not provide for the transfer of subsoil use rights or any property rights.
According to Olha Stefanishyna, Vice Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, the framework agreement between Ukraine and the United States is not an international treaty in the classical sense, but rather a political agreement that defines the parties’ intentions to create a joint Investment Recovery Fund.
