Seven departures from Ukraine Minerals Deal

The US and Ukraine have signed a transaction that will give Washington access to natural resources destroyed by the country.

Months in the process of creating it creates an investment fund that Ukraine hopes to consolidate assistance to the United States when the country struggles to beat Russia three years after the invasion.

The BBC has a transaction project but not final text. Based on this and public statements on both sides, here are seven key trips.

Earlier, Trump demanded that Ukraine return aid of $ 350 billion (264 billion pounds), which, he said, was granted to the United States during the war – a condition that rejected Zelensky.

But Washington seems to have made a concession. Prime Minister Ukraine Dennis Shmihal said the agreement did not dictate that his country was returning any alleged “debt”.

Trump stylized the agreement as a victory and for his part, saying that his country would return “much more theoretically” than the billions provided by Ukraine by his predecessor Joe Biden.

The language used by the United States in the announcement of the transaction is especially rigid to Russia than usual from the Trump administration.

The statement of the US Treasury Ministry said “a complete invasion of Russia” and adds that “no state or a person who financed or supplied a Russian military machine will benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine.”

It will be Harden Kyiv, which demanded more pressure on Russia in the negotiations between Moscow and Washington, discussing the possible ceasefire.

Despite the fact that most of the conversation around the transaction is connected with the mineral wealth of Ukraine, the agreement also includes provisions on new oil and gas projects and related infrastructure.

In all cases, resources remain in Ukraine, although the US will receive joint access.

This was regarded as a softening of the Ukrainian position because it was not in previous transaction projects.

Ukraine has long sought to join the European Union, and the accession negotiations officially began in June last year.

In Kiev, there are some problems that the resources transaction may interfere with Ukraine’s capacity to join the EU if it has given a preferential treatment of US investors, since Kyiv and Brussels already have a strategic raw material partnership.

But the text of the transaction states that the US recognizes Ukraine’s intention to join the EU and the need for this agreement does not contradict this.

It also states that if Ukraine needs to revise the terms of the transaction from the “additional commitments” within the EU accession, then the United States agrees to agree in good faith.

In addition, Kyiv says the US will support additional translations of investment and technology in Ukraine, including from the EU and elsewhere.

Another intriguing element of the transaction is that in the first decade the investment fund of revenue will be “fully reinforced in the economy of Ukraine”.

This is potentially important if there is no financial benefit for the US. Ukraine claims that it expects any money to go to the fund to restore the country and new projects.

After this initial period, the profit may extend between the partners. US Treasury Minister Scott Baby told Fox News that the transaction was a signal to the American people that “we have the opportunity to participate, get some financing and weapons, compensation for those who are a partner with Ukraine’s success.”

The United States has issued this transaction as an important signing if Ukraine continues to receive its military aid.

First Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Sviriden Ukraine – who has arrived in Washington to sign the deal – said it believes that there is new assistance in the US, such as air defense systems.

This also noted a change of strategy for Trump – seeking to stop military support to Ukraine after returning to the White House.

One of the great questions is that the agreement for the state of war will eventually mean. The Kremlin has not yet responded to the agreement.

It seems that there are no specific security guarantees from the US, and this is that Ukraine and Europe have long been pushing the White House to provide.

Trump has long been reluctant to give the same military commitment as Biden.

Instead, his interest in being in the course with the support of Ukraine is more implicit from the economic commitments stipulated by this transaction.

This means that there will still be fragility regarding the commitment of Ukraine’s most important ally.