
US, Ukraine may wait decade or more to see revenue from minerals deal
*
Minerals deal between US, Ukraine won't bear fruit for years
*
Threats posed by war with Russia will deter many investors
*
Challenges also include poor data, damaged power infrastructure
*
Russia occupies territory where several deposits are located
*
Ukraine sees deal as a way of improving relations with Trump
LONDON/KYIV, - The financial payoff from a new minerals deal between Ukraine and the U.S. is likely to take a decade or longer as investors face many hurdles to getting new mines into production in the war-ravaged country.
Developing mines that produce strategically important minerals in countries with established mining sectors such as Canada and Australia can take 10 to 20 years, mining consultants said on Thursday.
But most mineral deposits in Ukraine have scant data to confirm they are economically viable. Investors may also baulk at funnelling money into a country where infrastructure such as power and transport has been devastated by Russia's three-year-old full-scale invasion and future security is not guaranteed.
"If anyone's thinking suddenly all these minerals are going to be flying out of Ukraine, they're dreaming," said Adam Webb, head of minerals at consultancy Benchmark Minerals Intelligence.
"The reality is it's going to be difficult for people to justify investing money there when there are options to invest in critical minerals in countries that are not at war."
While the financial benefits from the deal are uncertain, officials in Ukraine hailed it as a political breakthrough: They believe it will help shore up U.S. support for Kyiv that has faltered under President Donald Trump.
Ukraine needs U.S. support - especially weapons and cash - to withstand Russia's military invasion.
On the U.S. side, Trump heavily promoted the deal, especially the access it provides to Ukraine's deposits of rare earth elements which are used in everything from cellphones to cars. So government policy could hasten investment.
The U.S. does not produce significant amounts of rare earths and has ramped up a trade war with China, the world's top supplier.
The text of the deal signed in Washington showed that revenues for the reconstruction fund would come from royalties, licence fees and production-sharing agreements.
The text mentions no financial terms, saying that the two sides still have to hammer out a limited partnership agreement between the U.S. International Development Finance Corp and Ukraine's State Organization Agency on Support for Public-Private Partnership.
The text details 55 minerals plus oil, natural gas and other hydrocarbons. According to Ukrainian data, the country has deposits of 22 of the 34 minerals identified by the European Union as critical, including rare earths, lithium and nickel.
"The transition from a discovered resource to an economically viable reserve requires significant time and investment, both of which have been constrained, not only since the onset of the war but even prior to it," said Willis Thomas at consultancy CRU.
Ukrainian finance ministry data showed that in 2024, the Ukrainian state earned 47.7 billion hryvnias, or around $1 billion, in royalties and other fees related to natural resources exploitation.
But the joint fund created under the deal will only get revenue from new licences, permits and production-sharing agreements concluded after the accord comes into force.
SLOW PACE OF MINING LICENSES
Ukraine was slow to issue new natural resources licenses before Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion. From 2012 to 2020, about 20 licences were issued for oil and gas, one for graphite, one for gold, two for manganese and one for copper, according to the Ukrainian geological service. There are 3,482 existing licenses in total.
Since the agreement creates a limited partnership, the two countries may be looking at direct government investment in a mining company, analysts said.
Chile, the world's biggest copper producer and owner of state mining company Codelco, could be an example they follow, Webb said.
Another hurdle is that some potentially lucrative projects are on land occupied by Russia, and the agreement does not include any security guarantees. Washington has said the presence of U.S. interests would deter aggressors.
Seven of 24 potential mining projects identified by Benchmark are in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine and include lithium, graphite, rare earth elements, nickel and manganese.
An official of a small Ukrainian company that holds the licence for the Polokhivske lithium deposit, one of the largest in Europe, told Reuters in February it would be tough to develop without Western security guarantees.
"The deal ties the U.S. more closely into Ukraine in that now they've got a bit more of a vested interest in this war coming to an end so that they can develop those assets," Webb said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hindustan Times
19 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Newsom says Trump is deploying another 2000 guards just to satisfy his ‘Presidential ego'
California Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday strongly condemned the Trump administration's decision to send another 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, calling it 'reckless' and 'pointless.' President Donald Trump had already deployed 2,000 guardsmen to the city over the weekend in response to widespread demonstrations that erupted following an ICE-led crackdown. 'At the order of the President, the Department of Defense is mobilizing an additional 2,000 California National Guard to be called into federal service to support ICE & to enable federal law-enforcement officers to safely conduct their duties,' Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell announced. 'The first 2,000? Given no food or water. Only approx. 300 are deployed -- the rest are sitting, unused, in federal buildings without orders. This isn't about public safety. It's about stroking a dangerous President's ego,' Newsom wrote on X (formerly Twitter.) 'This is Reckless. Pointless. And Disrespectful to our troops.' ALSO READ| Donald Trump calls for California governor's arrest amid LA protests, Gavin Newsom reacts: 'A day I hoped…' However, while defending the POTUS, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump authorised the deployment to 'address the lawlessness.' But Newsom sees it differently, accusing the administration of undermining California's sovereignty. He and State Attorney General Rob Bonta have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, arguing that federalising the state's National Guard without consent violates long-established constitutional boundaries. Newsom added that Trump's actions were 'inflaming tensions,' not easing them. What's more, the situation took another turn Monday when news broke that 700 U.S. Marines were also being sent into Los Angeles, without any clear communication or coordination with local authorities. 'The arrival of federal military forces in Los Angeles -- absent clear coordination -- presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us charged with safeguarding this city,' LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell said. He stresses the need for 'open and continuous lines of communication between all agencies to prevent confusion, avoid escalation, and ensure a coordinated, lawful, and orderly response during this critical time.' ALSO READ| Barron's friend shares video of LA rioter holding mock severed head of Trump, waving Mexican flag: 'Pure evil' 'U.S. Marines have served honorably across multiple wars in defense of democracy. They are heroes,' Newsom echoed those worries. 'They shouldn't be deployed on American soil facing their own countrymen to fulfill the deranged fantasy of a dictatorial President.'
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
33 minutes ago
- First Post
California sues Trump over National Guard deployment, Guv Newsom slams 'dictatorial' Trump for 'un-American' move
California has sued President Trump over his decision to deploy National Guard troops to Los Angeles without the governor's approval. Governor Gavin Newsom called the move 'un-American' and slammed Trump as 'dictatorial.' read more California sued the Trump administration on Monday for sending 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles without the governor's approval. The rare move has raised tensions between the federal government and the Democratic-led state. The lawsuit claims President Trump went beyond his powers by using a law meant for foreign invasions or rebellions to justify the deployment, despite Governor Gavin Newsom's opposition. 'Let me be clear: There is no invasion. There is no rebellion,' California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) said in a statement. 'The President is trying to manufacture chaos and crisis on the ground for his own political ends.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The lawsuit argues that Trump's action unlawfully violated Governor Newsom's authority as the head of California's National Guard. The White House did not immediately comment, but at an event soon after the lawsuit was filed, Trump defended his decision to send in the troops. California Governor Gavin Newsom slammed the 'deranged' decision Monday by 'dictatorial' US President Donald Trump to deploy hundreds of Marines to Los Angeles after days of unruly protests against immigration raids. 'U.S. Marines have served honorably across multiple wars in defense of democracy,' Newsom posted on X. 'They shouldn't be deployed on American soil facing their own countrymen to fulfill the deranged fantasy of a dictatorial President. This is un-American.'


Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Pro-family initiative': Donald Trump announces $1,000 government-funded accounts for American babies — who qualifies for the scheme?
Donald Trump announces a 'pro-family' legislation US President Donald Trump has unveiled a federal plan to boost future financial security for the next generation. The initiative includes opening $1,000 investment accounts for every American baby born between 2025 and 2029, reports the Guardian. The MAGA supremo describes this move as 'a pro-family' effort, which is part of a sweeping bill that has passed the House but still faces hurdles in the Senate. The accounts are dubbed as 'Trump accounts,' and would be tax-deferred and track stock market performance. 'For every US citizen born after December 31, 2024, before January 1, 2029, the federal government will make a one-time contribution of $1,000 into a tax-deferred account that will track the overall stock market,' Trump said during a White House roundtable with major business leaders. Parents or guardians will manage these "Trump accounts," which allow up to $5,000 in additional annual contributions from private sources. Trump pitched the initiative as a way for families to benefit directly from the strength of the American economy. 'It's a pro-family initiative that will help millions of Americans harness the strength of our economy to lift up the next generation,' he said. The plan has received strong backing from several prominent CEOs, including Michael Dell, Uber's Dara Khosrowshahi, Goldman Sachs' David Solomon and Robinhood's Vladimir Tenev. Trump applauded their commitment, saying they were 'really the greatest business minds we have today' and that they were 'committed to contributing millions of dollars to the Trump account.' House Speaker Mike Johnson also praised the scheme. 'It's a bold, transformative policy that gives every eligible American child a financial head start from day one,' he said. 'Republicans are proud to be the party we always have been. It supports life and families, prosperity and opportunity.' The accounts are part of what Trump calls his 'one big, beautiful bill.' The bill is a sweeping budget package that, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), could add $2.4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. The CBO also warned that the proposed changes, which include cuts to Medicaid and food assistance, could leave nearly 11 million more Americans without healthcare by 2034. Despite the criticism, Trump remains optimistic. 'Beneficiaries would really be getting a big jump on life, especially if we get a little bit lucky with some of the numbers and the economies into the future,' he said. Johnson warned that failing to pass the bill would lead to 'the largest tax increase in American history.' Johnson urged lawmakers to back what he called 'pro-growth legislation' to benefit all Americans.