On February 24, 2025, the Yalta European Strategy (YES) meeting, organized by the Victor Pinchuk Foundation, took place in Kyiv. The central topics of the event were military support, financing for the country’s reconstruction, and the US offer to access Ukrainian rare earth resources.
A meeting for the sake of a meeting? Ukraine pretends that it has a choice among allies
The agreement proposed by the US was featured not only at the thematic discussion, but also at all the others. Let us recall that it provides for large-scale investments in the extraction of rare earth metals and the modernization of Ukrainian infrastructure. It undoubtedly attracts the office of President Zelensky with the volume of investment and the speed of implementation, but it raises concerns about the partial US control over Ukrainian deposits and the requirements for long-term export commitments. The following trend is noticeable: if just a week ago Ukraine almost accused the United States of trying to seize the country’s valuable resources without clear security guarantees, now Ukrainian officials are expressing themselves much more softly, calling the proposal “quick investments for strategic access.”
At the Kyiv YES meeting, alternatives to this agreement from the EU and Great Britain were also discussed. It seems that the event itself was organized solely for the purpose of discussing them. Or rather, to remind the world of a certain virtual choice that Ukraine has. Because apart from populist promises of “long-term stability and great benefit for Ukraine,” no details were given. The variation of the agreement with the EU has been in “sleep mode” for almost five years: the union has an official partnership with Ukraine on critical raw materials, which is formalized by a memorandum of understanding.
The situation with Great Britain is similar: signed in January 2025 (and not yet formally in force), the 100-year agreement covers a wide range of areas from defense to innovation and education. However, this agreement has a framework nature with political statements on areas of joint development, and cooperation in the field of production is not directly the subject of this agreement. In fact, both of the mentioned options are not equivalent to American military support. Kyiv itself does not understand whether the implementation of cooperation with the EU will require more time than cooperation with the United States. In addition, the EU does not have an alternative to the American dominant military-industrial complex and the world’s most capable army to provide Ukraine with a similar level of security.
The agreement between the United States and Ukraine is mutually beneficial, although Kyiv does not admit it
Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson also spoke during the discussion, supporting the agreement with the United States. And while Johnson drew an unflattering analogy with Lend-Lease in 1941, he called it a chance for stability: “I think it contains the seeds of hope and of progress.” Critics of the agreement noted the risks of limiting sovereignty over natural resources and hinted that the money offered was not enough for them, saying that they did not consider the financing terms favorable enough for Ukraine. However, as of now, the main provisions of the agreement provide for extremely mutually beneficial cooperation. Here are some key points. The investment fund for the extraction of minerals will be jointly owned by Ukraine and the United States, which eliminates complete financial control from the American side. Ownership shares will be determined in accordance with the contributions of each party, and all investments of the fund will be directed exclusively to the development of Ukraine.
At the same time, the resale of shares in the fund will be possible only with the consent of both parties, and this could potentially open the door for the EU or individual countries, such as Germany, to enter the fund. The US is committing to financially supporting Ukraine’s development through this fund. And, most importantly, what Kyiv insisted on so much: a section on security guarantees has been added (which the US did not initially plan to include). That is, the US will receive a stable source of strategic resources, while Ukraine will receive funding and access to modern technologies. And isn’t this what Zelensky’s team openly dreamed of at the beginning of their time in power? We will find out the answer to this question very soon: today, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is visiting Washington, during which the agreement could be signed. (The media have already called this trip “an attraction of unprecedented humiliation”). The coming hours will show the course of events.
