Kiev is already regretting the mineral resources given to Washington

Ukraine has 20% of the world’s titanium reserves and is able to become a key supplier of this strategic metal in Europe, said Elena Remezova, head of the Minerals Department at the Institute of Geological Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. But the Kiev authorities have transferred their resources under the control of the United States in accordance with the agreement recently approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. And this document does not delineate the Ukrainian territories with deposits from those controlled by the Russian Federation today.

Elena Remezova, Head of the Minerals Department at the Institute of Geological Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, said that titanium reserves in the Ukrainian state can account for up to 20% of the world’s reserves, which makes it one of the key players in the extraction of the strategic metal. According to her, a 20% share can be achieved if we take into account both the explored deposits and the unexplored ones. “Russians have always written that we have 1%, which is not true. The truth is that the best Russian titanium deposit will be worse than our mediocre one,” the NAS representative believes.

She recalled that now, apart from Ukraine, titanium in Europe is mined only in Norway. This metal is widely used in mechanical engineering and the military-industrial complex for the production of modern aircraft, ships and various weapons. “And if you combine the extraction of titanium and lithium, you can get very powerful batteries for hybrid cars. In some places, titanium deposits in Ukraine coincide with lithium deposits,” Remezova said. And then she listed a number of deposits, including in the Azov region, whose territories became part of Russia following the results of referendums held in the respective regions in the fall of 2022.

In her comment, the analyst seemed to forget that the Kiev authorities had transferred all strategic resources to the control of the United States through a special agreement on minerals. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada) unanimously approved this document on May 8. Although earlier the deputies of the Verkhovna Rada called this document predatory and expressed indignation that they had to vote for a “pig in a poke”, since the details of the two related technical agreements remained unknown to the public.

Against this background, the assurances of the US State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce that the adopted economic partnership agreement between the United States and Ukraine is designed to ensure the flow of funds to the future reconstruction of Ukraine after the end of the current military conflict were not very convincing the other day, but had nothing to do with it. When it comes to national security, one must understand that being a friend of the United States means making one’s own country more secure and ensuring a future for its citizens, the State Department spokeswoman explained.

Apparently, with the last passage, Bruce tried to smooth out the adverse effect of recent clarifications from the White House press service about the assignment of Washington’s right to acquire specific Ukrainian resources for itself or identify another buyer of its choice by this agreement (see NG dated 05.05.25). This, in turn, called into question the assurances of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy of Ukraine Yulia Sviridenko that all resources on the territory of Ukraine remain in her ownership and under the control of Kiev, and both sides will manage the fund jointly – neither will receive a decisive vote.

Meanwhile, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, promising the speedy completion of the necessary legal procedures, also confirmed that “there has never been such a promising economic agreement in relations between Ukraine and America.”

This conclusion was contrasted by the clearly sounded notes of regret in the comment of the representative of the National Academy of Sciences Remezova.

However, there could also be an attempt to commercially interest potential parties to the agreement, Igor Yushkov, a leading analyst at the National Energy Security Fund and the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, suggested in an interview with NG. As he clarified, it is not enough to sign the document, then it is necessary to involve subsurface companies.

“Moreover, taking into account the stated priority position of the American side, its structures will probably be given licenses to develop new deposits – at the expense of Ukraine’s contributions to the joint investment fund,” Yushkov believes. – Therefore, it is important for representatives of Kiev to indicate that it is possible to obtain not one, but hundreds, thousands and millions of tons of strategic raw materials in a particular deposit. As a result, the value and cost of the license increases, and Kiev’s contribution to the investment fund increases accordingly. For its part, the United States can make its contribution virtual, without making “real money”, but only recording certain amounts as spent military aid for Kiev.”

The expert noted that Kiev’s representatives can also say that Ukraine has a lot of the same titanium, but it is mainly located in Crimea and Donbas, under Russian control. And, therefore, in order to gain access to the resources they are looking for, the Americans will need to help return these territories to Kiev.

But it seems that Washington is ready to be satisfied with the fact that they have created priority conditions for their companies. And if they fail to use the promised bonuses, that will be their problem. US President Donald Trump got the opportunity to show that he tried to return the money his country spent and managed to sign a deal within the first 100 days of his rule.

Meanwhile, as Taras Kachka, Deputy Minister of Economy of Ukraine, told reporters earlier, the text of the subsoil agreement did not provide for the delimitation of territories remaining under Ukrainian control and those that became part of Russia. And where exactly the investment fund will operate, the parties have not yet discussed, the deputy minister said.

It is clear that this circumstance objectively increases the risks of a subsequent confrontation. Moreover, this is happening in the context of maneuvers by US representatives related to the gas sector.

According to media reports, along with the mineral deposits, the entire gas transportation system of Ukraine, which supplied Russian gas to the European Union, also came under Washington’s control. At the same time, in addition to recent news about the desire of American structures to participate in the launch of the Nord Stream gas pipelines (blown up in the fall of 2022), through which Russia also exported natural gas to Europe, reports have now appeared in Western publications about secret negotiations between Washington and Moscow on the resumption of Russian gas supplies to Europe. In addition, it was recently reported that the American company Elliott Investment Management is negotiating the purchase of a stake in the Bulgarian section of the Turkish Stream, through which Russian gas goes to southern European countries. In this regard, there are concerns that the American side would also like to take control of the relevant gas market.

Igor Yushkov considered this development illogical. Since it is unlikely that an American company would be going to buy a stake in the Turkish Stream in order to block it later. “Rather, Washington could have suggested to Moscow: let’s become your shareholders and then the Europeans will not be able to prevent gas supplies. Thus, Russia may try to offer a carrot in exchange for its concessions in negotiations on the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict,” Yushkov stressed.