Free Unlock White House Watch News
Your guide on what the 2024 U.S. election means to Washington and the world
U.S. Treasury Secretary defends a deal with Donald Trump to develop its natural resources and key minerals, saying the plan will intensify post-war growth in the country and does not involve any mandatory economic pressure .
Scott Bessent’s comments in the Financial Times column come as Trump administration officials are trying to establish economic partnerships with them, which is their broader diplomacy Part of the effort to promote a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine.
Ukrainian officials have so far rejected U.S. demands for the deal, but U.S. officials have put a lot of pressure on Kiev when pushing for the deal.
Officials in Kiev believe Trump hit Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy this week, calling him a dictator and suggesting war to Ukraine instead of Russia, which is to arm Kiev as The way to trade minerals.
In the column, Bessent lists some details of the US recommendations. He said that Ukraine’s revenue from “natural resources, infrastructure and other assets” would be “distributed to funds targeting Ukraine’s long-term reconstruction and development, where the U.S. will have economic and governance in future investments right”.
However, Bessent did not say how much the proceeds from mineral extraction would be allocated to the fund, or how much it would be paid to the United States. Trump proposed a mineral deal to ensure Ukraine’s return to previous U.S. military aid.
The latest draft agreement dates Friday and was seen by the Financial Times, calling for a reconstruction investment fund in which the United States “maintains 100% of its financial interests.”
Ukraine will contribute 50% of the fund’s revenue through mineral resources until its contributions reach US$50 billion. This number is being negotiated as unacceptable by Ukrainian officials.
Ukrainian Parliament President Ruslan Stefanchuk said on Saturday that Kiev could reach a deal starting Monday.
Another Ukrainian official stressed that the signing was only signed after obtaining security guarantees in Kiev.
In his column, Bessent said the agreement would include “a private framework necessary for attracting strong private investments in post-war growth in Ukraine”, and that U.S. participation would not have Leave room for corruption. and insider trading.”
The U.S. Treasury Secretary traveled to Ukraine on his first international trip earlier this month to sell the deal with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
While U.S. officials, including Trump’s national security adviser Mike Waltz, said they believe the agreement was tight, Ukrainian officials were more under surveillance.
“The draft on the table now requires more work,” said one person involved in the negotiation. “We see that Ukraine has many obligations and very weak things.” [offered] From the American side, drafts, nowadays, are not ready to be accepted at the presidential level. ”
Negotiations reached the early morning of the third day and will continue on Saturday and Sunday.
Zelenskyy said Bessent’s original proposal was not in Ukraine’s interest as it demanded 50% of the rights to the country’s rare earth and critical minerals in exchange for past military aid and did not include any future aid.
Senior Ukrainian officials said they had drawn anti-Promon dances over the past week, and they had a discussion with Ukrainian envoy Keith Kellogg, who was in Kiev on Thursday and Friday.
Zelenskyy hopes the Trump administration provides security assurances in the new proposal before agreeing to sign it.
Bessent said in his column that the terms of the deal would “ensure that countries that do not contribute to defending Ukraine’s sovereignty will not benefit from their reconstruction or these investments.”
Bessent also suggested that the United States does not attempt to control Ukraine’s natural resources. “It’s also clear that this is not what. The United States will not own the ownership of physical assets in Ukraine. Nor will it put Ukraine in trouble with more debt. This economic pressure, while deployed by other global players, will not promote the United States or Ukraine’s interests,” he wrote.
