The United States is ensuring it holds the reins over all future major infrastructure and mineral investments in Ukraine, potentially gaining a veto over any involvement from Kyiv’s European allies. At the same time, this move risks jeopardising Ukraine’s bid to join the European Union. It’s a classic case of Washington flexing its economic muscles while Europe watches on, powerless and increasingly irrelevant.

According to some diplomatic sources, the Trump administration demands the “right of first offer” on investments in all infrastructure and natural resource projects under a revised partnership agreement with Ukraine. If accepted, the agreement would grant the U.S. sweeping control over investments in Ukraine’s roads, railways, ports, mining, oil and gas, and the extraction of critical minerals – all while the EU sits awkwardly in the corner, trying to remember if it’s still relevant.
This agreement would also give the U.S. preemptive rights over any revenues transferred to a special investment fund for reconstruction controlled by Washington. And here’s the kicker: the Americans want Ukraine to repay all the military and economic support it has received since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022 before Kyiv sees a single penny of revenue from this fund.

The proposal was handed over to Ukrainian officials last weekend, following a tense confrontation between President Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump in the Oval Office last month. The White House stated that the new arrangement goes beyond the previous deal concerning Ukraine’s critical minerals. Washington is seemingly determined to get its slice of the pie before Europe even gets a sniff.
Negotiations are ongoing, and Ukraine is expected to submit its amendments to the document later this week. But the message from Washington is clear: if you want American support, you better be prepared to pay for it.

President Zelensky, meanwhile, finds himself in a tight spot, desperately trying to keep his Western allies onside while being strong-armed by the White House. During a summit in Paris with European leaders, Zelensky acknowledged that the proposed agreement required a “detailed study” and was still evolving. But he was also quick to add that Ukraine wouldn’t do anything to provoke Washington into cutting off support.

Predictably, the U.S. Treasury Department insists the mining agreement is about creating a “sustainable economic relationship” with Ukraine, one that promises “long-term security and peace”—as if anyone believes peace in Eastern Europe is achievable through a lopsided investment agreement controlled by a foreign superpower.
Under the proposed deal, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) would control the investment fund, appointing three of the five board members and holding a “golden share” granting it special voting rights to block decisions it doesn’t like. Ukraine would appoint the other two board members but would be forbidden from interfering with the fund’s day-to-day management. Clearly, Kyiv’s opinion on how to rebuild its own country is just a little too inconvenient.
Adding insult to injury, the U.S. demands that Ukraine invest 50% of all profits from new natural resource and infrastructure projects into the fund. Washington wants a 4% annual return on top of all profits until their investment is paid back. It’s like the IMF, but even more condescending.
Perhaps the most outrageous clause is the requirement for Ukraine to submit all projects to the fund for approval at the earliest possible stage, with the DFC given a say over any programme financed. And if the U.S. fund rejects a project, Ukraine is forbidden from offering the same deal to another party under “significantly more favourable conditions” for at least a year.
And, just to rub salt into the wound, the U.S. will have the right to purchase Ukraine’s metals, minerals, oil, and gas before anyone else – regardless of whether the project was funded through the partnership or not.

From Europe’s perspective, this is a nightmare. As Ukraine inches toward EU membership, Washington’s heavy-handed approach to investment control could severely complicate its accession talks. Worse still, the EU’s attempts to present itself as a strategic partner in Ukraine’s reconstruction look increasingly feeble next to America’s all-or-nothing approach.
The fundamental difference between how the U.S. and the EU approach Ukraine is at the heart of this whole charade. Washington wants leverage, pure and simple. Meanwhile, the EU dreams of some idealistic partnership with Ukraine that respects sovereignty and mutual interest – except it’s just too weak and divided to enforce its vision.
In the end, if Ukraine accepts America’s terms, it will have effectively sold itself to the highest bidder. And if it doesn’t, it risks losing its only serious military backing against Russian aggression. One can almost hear the muffled laughter echoing from Moscow.