Trump pulls the wool over our eyes with crooked "mineral deal"

[Snowball]

Decent articles about the agreement
Notice the 10-year (profits to stay in Ukraine)
and Ukrainian expectation for air defense from US

Seven takeaways from Ukraine minerals deal

What this will and won't change for US assistance to Ukraine, three years into the war.

www.bbc.com

https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/01/world/what-we-know-about-trumps-ukraine-mineral-deal-intl

---White House Statement ---

highlights reveal the private (Wall Street/Washington/London banking insiders) enthusiasm
the Ukrainian PPP sells interests in "tenders" to Big Finance (Blackrock, etc) - see link to their site

"If the United States decides to acquire these resources for ourselves, we will given first choice to either acquire them or designate the purchaser of our choice."

translation: this means that to those assets Ukraine chooses to allow the US to acquire, it's not going to be the US but rather the ownership will be private billionaires and corporations (not the American people)

"This partnership between the United States and Ukraine establishes a fund that will receive 50% of royalties, license fees, and other similar payments from natural resource projects in Ukraine.
That money will be invested in new projects in Ukraine (10 year exclusivity see links above), which will generate long term returns for both the American and Ukrainian peoples.
The Treasury Department and the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) will work together with the Government of Ukraine to finalize governance and advance this important partnership."

"The United States’ DFC will work together with Ukraine’s State Organization Agency on Support Public-Private Partnership, both of which are backed by the full faith and credit of their respective nations." PPP website:[no-embed] https://pppagency.gov.ua/about/[/no-embed]

"Indirect benefits will include a stronger private sector"

translation: Wall Street, Washington insiders and London banks divvy up the loot under DFC and PPP disbursements.

"Economic security is national security, and this important safeguard prevents critical resources from falling into the wrong hands.
Importantly, this partnership sends a strong message to Russia – the United States has skin in the game and is committed to Ukraine’s long-term success."

translation: bankers and gov insiders once again using the US population and its military to secure/enforce their own global business acquisitions.

Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Secures Agreement to Establish United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund

A FIRST-OF-ITS-KIND HISTORIC PARTNERSHIP: Under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump, the US and Ukraine entered into a historic agreement on April

www.whitehouse.gov

additional note: Unconstitutional without Senate approval (nobody cares)
Article II, Section 2: Treaty Power and Appointments
I. Treaty Power. The Constitution provides, in the second paragraph of Article II, Section 2, that "the President shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur."

 

[Snowball]

Right now, the Senate has the DUTY to vote on this treaty with Ukraine.

They are all in on the scam.

Nobody is even raising the prospect. Our media is owned by them and our Congress is owned by them also.

As is Donald Trump. The only distinction with Trump is that he fancies himself ONE of them, not OWNED by them.
The distinction is worthless and only exists in his ego.

You know what they are doing? Hooking up and calling their bankers and lawyers to arrange LLC's so they make billions.

And the MIC will again act as security guard for the oligarchs -- putting our country on the line for their own greed.

 

[PAF]

A+ thread, I hope others will read and examine this so that they can understand what's really going on.

 

[wizardwatson]

A+ thread, I hope others will read and examine this so that they can understand what's really going on.

Same thing that's always going on with Trump. He goes whatever way the ZOG wind blows and lies and says "peace and prosperity".

The implications of this deal violate every red line Russia has repeatedly stated since Russia actively entered the conflict in 2022.

 

[PAF]

Same thing that's always going on with Trump. He goes whatever way the ZOG wind blows and lies and says "peace and prosperity".

The implications of this deal violate every red line Russia has repeatedly stated since Russia actively entered the conflict in 2022.

Also:

'Capitalism’s Biggest Threat Isn’t Inequality—It’s Artificial Entrepreneurs'

May 1, 2025

Alexis Sémanne
05/01/2025


Inequality has become one of the defining issues of our time. Economist Thomas Piketty—among others—has popularized the idea that capitalism inevitably concentrates wealth in the hands of a few. His solution? More taxes, more redistribution, and more government intervention.

But what if Piketty is missing a deeper problem—one that libertarians and classical liberals must urgently address? In a recent paper published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies, I argue that much of today’s inequality does not stem from the free market at all, but...

• PAF
• Replies: 3
• Forum: U.S. Political News

• 

 

[Invisible Man]

Instead of a peace deal, or any kind of deal that gets us out of entanglement in the Ukraine Russia conflict, we get the exact opposite, and get told that that's what this exact opposite thing really is.

 

[Snowball]

Instead of a peace deal, or any kind of deal that gets us out of entanglement in the Ukraine Russia conflict, we get the exact opposite, and get told that that's what this exact opposite thing really is.

we'll have to wait and see what we really get. it might be a lot worse than being lied to and abused (par for the course), if Russia's security needs are jeopardized. What happens when Putin calls the bluff?

 

[Snowball]

-----------

Sergei Markov, a former Kremlin adviser, said he thought the deal between Washington and Kyiv would make it harder for Russia to achieve its goals in Ukraine through peace talks because Trump had set up a mechanism to "justify" new spending on the war.

"The U.S. is beginning to see itself as a sort of co-owner of Ukraine. Therefore, it will take a position that it considers pro-Ukrainian," Markov forecast.

Ukraine Minerals Deal Means Trump Forced Kyiv To Pay For US Aid: Russia

Senior Russian security official Dmitry says signing of a minerals deal between Ukraine and the United States meant US President Donald Trump had forced Kyiv to pay for US aid.

www.ndtv.com

------------

AI Overview
Learn more
The United States and Ukraine have signed an "economic partnership agreement" establishing the "United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund". This agreement, while not explicitly needing Senate approval, includes provisions for U.S. access to Ukrainian mineral resources and natural resources. The deal is intended to aid Ukraine's economic recovery and reconstruction.

No Direct Senate Approval:
While the agreement involves substantial financial commitments and resource access, it doesn't appear to require a formal Senate vote.

source: AI Overview (Google home page)

I cannot find ANY other reference to the Senate considering voting on the matter, which would certainly pass anyway, but
you think they might at least maintain appearances for formality, but I guess that's not even necessary anymore.
The text even includes this line: "backed by the full faith and credit of their respective nations.".

 

[TheTexan]

I think Trump was basically told by everyone around him that we need to "keep supporting Ukraine".

And then Trump came up with this deal to protect his ego so it wouldn't look like he caved to the pressure. Which of course he did.

Spineless turd.

 

[wizardwatson]

Instead of a peace deal, or any kind of deal that gets us out of entanglement in the Ukraine Russia conflict, we get the exact opposite, and get told that that's what this exact opposite thing really is.

But wait! It gets worse!

The latest text clearly ties supplied weapons to shares of the minerals.

I remember marching in a "no blood for oil" protest with my dad circa 1991 when I was around 13.

The government used to have a bit of shame and wouldn't openly state this. Now, they write it down, brag about it and call it peace.

 

[wizardwatson]

Right now, the Senate has the DUTY to vote on this treaty with Ukraine.

They are all in on the scam.

Nobody is even raising the prospect. Our media is owned by them and our Congress is owned by them also.

As is Donald Trump. The only distinction with Trump is that he fancies himself ONE of them, not OWNED by them.
The distinction is worthless and only exists in his ego.

You know what they are doing? Hooking up and calling their bankers and lawyers to arrange LLC's so they make billions.

And the MIC will again act as security guard for the oligarchs -- putting our country on the line for their own greed.

Maybe the Nazi regime can teach our Congress about checks and balances. They have to ratify it.

Dotard Trump is doing a great job of restoring America. No one's mocking us anymore. Everyone's just exhausted from all the winning.

 

[Snowball]

Rut Roh. It gets A LOT WORSE.


-----------------------------------------------

WHEREAS, the United States of America and Ukraine recognize the contribution that Ukraine has made to strengthening international peace and security by voluntarily relinquishing the world's third largest arsenal of nuclear weapons;

(what they don't tell you is that those nukes never belonged to Ukraine. They were built by Russians when Ukraine was part of Russia.)

^^^^ totally out of place there. it's purpose ? keep reading ^^^^

WHEREAS, the United States of America and Ukraine seek to create the conditions necessary to, among other objectives, increase investment in mining, energy, and related technology in Ukraine by third parties including, but not limited to, international investors based in the United States of America, the European Union, and other States supporting Ukraine's defense against Russia's full-scale invasion;

^^^^ suggests Ukraine is no longer bound to be non-nuclear ^^^^

full text:

The full text of the US, Ukraine minerals agreement

U.S. officials framed the agreement as a sign of lasting support for Ukraine, and it comes amid an apparent resetting of relations between Presidents Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky.

kyivindependent.com

Budapest Memorandum overview:

The Budapest Memorandum 1994 After 30 Years: Non-Proliferation Success Overshadowed by NATO Blowup Then, Russian War on Ukraine Now | National Security Archive

Washington, D.C., December 5, 2024 – Thirty years ago, the Budapest Memorandum ensured the destruction of dangerous post-Soviet nuclear stockpiles but was overshadowed at the time by Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s complaint that NATO expansion was causing a new division of Europe, according...

nsarchive.gwu.edu

Observation:

Ukraine has maintained that Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, and the ensuing conflict, are Russian violations of the Budapest Memorandum.

The language of this contract between the U.S. and Ukraine suggests that the U.S. acknowledges Ukraine has the sovereign right to no longer abide by the Budapest Memorandum. There is no other reason why this clause would be inserted in a "minerals deal".

Additionally, another clause mentions investment in "energy" and "related technology" (presumably could include nuclear) - by "third parties" or non-governmental corporations -- namely -- "international investors based in the United States of America, the European Union, and other States supporting Ukraine's defense against Russia's full-scale invasion"

What we could be looking at is the first instance of a privately-controlled nuclear arsenal.

 

[wizardwatson]

Had to find a place not full of ads to get the full text, here it is if you wanna chuck it into an AI:


BILATERAL AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR A RECONSTRUCTION INVESTMENT FUND

WHEREAS the United States of America has provided significant financial and material support to Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022;

WHEREAS the American people desire to invest alongside Ukraine in a free, sovereign and secure Ukraine;

WHEREAS the United States of America and Ukraine desire a lasting peace in Ukraine and a durable partnership between their two peoples and governments;

WHEREAS the United States of America and Ukraine recognize the contribution that Ukraine has made to strengthening international peace and security by voluntarily abandoning the world’s third largest arsenal of nuclear weapons;

WHEREAS the United States of America and Ukraine wish to ensure that those States and other persons that have acted adversely to Ukraine in the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine following a lasting peace;

NOW, THEREFORE, the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Ukraine (each, a “Participant”) hereby enter into this Bilateral Agreement Establishing Terms and Conditions for a Reconstruction Investment Fund to deepen the partnership between the United States of America and Ukraine, as set forth herein.

1. The Governments of Ukraine and the United States of America, with the aim of achieving lasting peace in Ukraine, intend to establish a Reconstruction Investment Fund (Fund), partnering in the Fund through joint ownership, to be further defined in the Fund Agreement. Joint ownership will take into consideration the actual contributions of the Participants as defined in Sections 3 and 4. The Fund will be jointly managed by representatives of the Government of Ukraine and the Government of the United States of America. More detailed terms pertaining to the Fund’s governance and operation will be set forth in a subsequent agreement (the Fund Agreement) to be negotiated promptly after the conclusion of this Bilateral Agreement. The maximum percentage of ownership of the Fund’s equity and financial interests to be held by the Government of the United States of America and the decision-making authority of the representatives of the Government of the United States of America will be to the extent permissible under applicable United States laws.

Neither Participant will sell, transfer or otherwise dispose of, directly or indirectly, any portion of its interest in the Fund without the prior written consent of the other Participant.

2. The Fund will collect and reinvest revenues contributed to the Fund, minus expenses incurred by the Fund, and will earn income from the future monetization of all relevant Ukrainian Government-owned natural resource assets (whether owned directly or indirectly by the Ukrainian Government), as defined in Section 3.

3. The Government of Ukraine will contribute to the Fund 50 percent of all revenues earned from the future monetization of all relevant Ukrainian Government-owned natural resource assets (whether owned directly or indirectly by the Ukrainian Government), defined as deposits of minerals, hydrocarbons, oil, natural gas, and other extractable materials, and other infrastructure relevant to natural resource assets (such as liquified natural gas terminals and port infrastructure) as agreed by both Participants, as may be further described in the Fund Agreement. For the avoidance of doubt, such future sources of revenues do not include the current sources of revenues which are already part of the general budget revenues of Ukraine. Timeline, scope and sustainability of contributions will be further defined in the Fund Agreement.

The Fund, in its sole discretion, may credit or return to the Government of Ukraine actual expenses incurred by the newly developed projects from which the Fund receives revenues.

Contributions made to the Fund will be reinvested at least annually in Ukraine to promote the safety, security and prosperity of Ukraine, to be further defined in the Fund Agreement. The Fund Agreement will also provide for future distributions.

4. Subject to applicable United States law, the Government of the United States of America will maintain a long-term financial commitment to the development of a stable and economically prosperous Ukraine. Further contributions may be comprised of funds, financial instruments, and other tangible and intangible assets critical for the reconstruction of Ukraine.

5. The Fund’s investment process will be designed so as to invest in projects in Ukraine and attract investments to increase the development, processing and monetization of all public and private Ukrainian assets including, but not limited to, deposits of minerals, hydrocarbons, oil, natural gas, and other extractable materials, infrastructure, ports, and state-owned enterprises as may be further described in the Fund Agreement. The Government of the United States of America and the Government of Ukraine intend that the investment process will lead to opportunities for distribution of additional funds and greater reinvestment, to ensure the sufficient supply of capital for the reconstruction of Ukraine as set out in the Fund Agreement.

The Participants reserve the right to take such action as necessary to protect and maximize the value of their economic interests in the Fund.

6. The Fund Agreement will include appropriate representations and warranties, including those necessary to ensure that any obligations the Government of Ukraine may have to third parties, or such obligations that it may undertake in the future, do not sell, convey, transfer pledge, or otherwise encumber the Government of Ukraine’s contributions to the Fund or the assets from which such contributions are derived, or the Fund’s disposition of funds.

In drafting the Fund Agreement, the Participants will strive to avoid conflicts with Ukraine’s obligations under its accession to the European Union or its obligations under arrangements with international financial institutions and other official creditors.

7. The Fund Agreement will provide, inter alia, an acknowledgment that both the Fund Agreement and the activities provided for therein are commercial in nature.

The Fund agreement shall be ratified by the Parliament of Ukraine according to the Law of Ukraine «On International Treaties of Ukraine».

8. The Fund Agreement will pay particular attention to the control mechanisms that make it impossible to weaken, violate or circumvent sanctions and other restrictive measures.

9. The text of the Fund Agreement will be developed without delay by working groups chaired by authorized representatives of the Government of Ukraine and the Government of the United States of America. Contact persons responsible for preparing the Fund Agreement on the basis of this Bilateral Agreement are: from the Government of the United States of America: the Department of the Treasury; from the Government of Ukraine: Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Economy.

10. This Bilateral Agreement and the Fund Agreement will constitute integral elements of the architecture of bilateral and multilateral agreements, as well as concrete steps to establish lasting peace, and to strengthen economic security resilience and reflect the objectives set forth in the preamble to this Bilateral Agreement.

The Government of the United States of America supports Ukraine’s efforts to obtain security guarantees needed to establish lasting peace. Participants will seek to identify any necessary steps to protect mutual investments, as defined in the Fund Agreement.

11. This Bilateral Agreement is binding and will be implemented by each Participant according to its domestic procedures. The Government of the United States of America and the Government of Ukraine commit to proceed forthwith to negotiate the Fund Agreement.

Signed on 25 February 2025 in English and Ukrainian languages, both texts are equally authentic.

For the Government of the United States of America:

Scott K. H. Bessent

Secretary of the Treasury

For the Government of Ukraine:

Yulia Svyrydenko

First Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine — Minister of Economy of Ukraine

 

[wizardwatson]

Rut Roh. It gets A LOT WORSE.


-----------------------------------------------

WHEREAS, the United States of America and Ukraine recognize the contribution that Ukraine has made to strengthening international peace and security by voluntarily relinquishing the world's third largest arsenal of nuclear weapons;

(what they don't tell you is that those nukes never belonged to Ukraine. They were built by Russians when Ukraine was part of Russia.)

^^^^ totally out of place there. it's purpose ? keep reading ^^^^

WHEREAS, the United States of America and Ukraine seek to create the conditions necessary to, among other objectives, increase investment in mining, energy, and related technology in Ukraine by third parties including, but not limited to, international investors based in the United States of America, the European Union, and other States supporting Ukraine's defense against Russia's full-scale invasion;

^^^^ suggests Ukraine is no longer bound to be non-nuclear ^^^^

full text:

The full text of the US, Ukraine minerals agreement

U.S. officials framed the agreement as a sign of lasting support for Ukraine, and it comes amid an apparent resetting of relations between Presidents Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky.

kyivindependent.com

Budapest Memorandum overview:

The Budapest Memorandum 1994 After 30 Years: Non-Proliferation Success Overshadowed by NATO Blowup Then, Russian War on Ukraine Now | National Security Archive

Washington, D.C., December 5, 2024 – Thirty years ago, the Budapest Memorandum ensured the destruction of dangerous post-Soviet nuclear stockpiles but was overshadowed at the time by Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s complaint that NATO expansion was causing a new division of Europe, according...

nsarchive.gwu.edu

Observation:

Ukraine has maintained that Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, and the ensuing conflict, are Russian violations of the Budapest Memorandum.

The language of this contract between the U.S. and Ukraine suggests that the U.S. acknowledges Ukraine has the sovereign right to no longer abide by the Budapest Memorandum. There is no other reason why this clause would be inserted in a "minerals deal".

Additionally, another clause mentions investment in "energy" and "related technology" (presumably could include nuclear) - by "third parties" or non-governmental corporations -- namely -- "international investors based in the United States of America, the European Union, and other States supporting Ukraine's defense against Russia's full-scale invasion"

What we could be looking at is the first instance of a privately-controlled nuclear arsenal.

Thanks for this. I asked Grok about it. It is back-door Russian aggression from U.S. couched in a deal. If Trump was truly about peace, he would have done the deal with Ukraine as part of the peace deal with Russia. U.S. keeps pretending it isn't a primary stakeholder in this, which is insulting to the intellect at this point:

ME: Contexutalize the mention of the Budapest Memorandum? What does the agreement say about it, and what would this mean to Russia.

GROK 3:


Contextualizing the Budapest Memorandum in the U.S.-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund Agreement

The Budapest Memorandum, signed in 1994, is referenced in the preamble of the Bilateral Agreement Establishing Terms and Conditions for a Reconstruction Investment Fund between the United States and Ukraine, dated February 25, 2025. The memorandum is a critical historical and diplomatic touchstone, and its mention in the agreement carries significant implications for Russia, given the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and the broader geopolitical context.

Reference in the Agreement

The preamble of the agreement states:

"WHEREAS the United States of America and Ukraine recognize the contribution that Ukraine has made to strengthening international peace and security by voluntarily abandoning the world’s third largest arsenal of nuclear weapons;"

This clause indirectly refers to the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, under which Ukraine relinquished its nuclear arsenal— inherited from the Soviet Union— in exchange for security assurances from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia. Signed on December 5, 1994, the memorandum committed the signatories to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity, refrain from the use or threat of force, and avoid economic coercion. In return, Ukraine acceded to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a non-nuclear-weapon state.

The agreement does not explicitly name the Budapest Memorandum but alludes to Ukraine’s denuclearization, framing it as a contribution to global peace and security. By invoking this history, the agreement underscores Ukraine’s compliance with international norms and implicitly critiques Russia’s violation of the memorandum through its 2014 annexation of Crimea and the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The preamble’s emphasis on a “free, sovereign, and secure Ukraine” further aligns with the memorandum’s assurances, positioning the U.S. as a partner upholding these commitments.

What the Budapest Memorandum Says

The Budapest Memorandum includes six key assurances from the U.S., UK, and Russia to Ukraine:

1. Respect Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, and existing borders.
2. Refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territorial integrity or political independence.
3. Refrain from economic coercion to subordinate Ukraine to their interests.
4. Seek immediate UN Security Council action to assist Ukraine if it faces aggression or threats involving nuclear weapons.
5. Not use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, except in response to a nuclear attack.
6. Consult in the event of a situation raising questions about these commitments.

Additionally, China and France provided separate, less binding assurances. The memorandum was not a formal treaty but a political agreement, lacking enforceable mechanisms, which has been a point of contention since Russia’s violations.
Implications for Russia

The mention of Ukraine’s denuclearization in the context of the 2025 agreement is likely to provoke a negative reaction from Russia for several reasons:

1. Highlighting Russia’s Violations: By referencing Ukraine’s sacrifice of nuclear weapons, the agreement implicitly accuses Russia of breaching the Budapest Memorandum. Russia’s 2014 and 2022 actions— annexing Crimea, occupying eastern Ukraine, and waging war— directly contravene the memorandum’s assurances of sovereignty and non-aggression. This framing casts Russia as an unreliable international actor, undermining its diplomatic credibility and justifying Western support for Ukraine.
2. Strengthening U.S.-Ukraine Ties: The agreement’s nod to the memorandum signals U.S. commitment to Ukraine’s security and sovereignty, reinforcing the moral and political obligation stemming from 1994. For Russia, this deepens the perception of U.S. interference in its sphere of influence, especially as the deal secures U.S. economic interests in Ukraine’s natural resources (e.g., critical minerals, hydrocarbons). This economic foothold could prolong Ukraine’s resistance to Russian demands in peace talks, frustrating Moscow’s strategic goals.
3. Complicating Peace Negotiations: Signed during a period when the U.S. is reportedly seeking peace with Russia (as of early 2025, amid Trump administration efforts), the agreement’s reference to the memorandum is provocative. It emphasizes Ukraine’s historical concessions and Russia’s failure to reciprocate, potentially hardening Ukraine’s stance in negotiations. Russia, which has proposed its own minerals deals involving occupied Ukrainian territories, may see the U.S.-Ukraine fund as a deliberate move to sideline its economic and territorial ambitions, especially since the agreement bars entities acting “adversely to Ukraine” (i.e., Russia) from benefiting.
4. Nuclear and Security Sensitivities: The memorandum’s nuclear context is particularly sensitive. Russia has justified its actions in Ukraine partly as a response to perceived NATO encroachment, arguing that Ukraine’s Western alignment threatens its security. By invoking Ukraine’s denuclearization, the agreement may remind Russia of its own nuclear commitments under the memorandum, while subtly highlighting Ukraine’s vulnerability without nuclear deterrence. This could fuel Russian paranoia about Western intentions, especially if Ukraine’s reconstruction strengthens its integration with NATO or the EU.
5. Diplomatic and Propaganda Challenges: In Russian narratives, the Budapest Memorandum is often downplayed or reframed as a Western betrayal, with claims that NATO expansion violated implicit understandings. The agreement’s reference could be exploited by Russian propaganda to argue that the U.S. is rewriting history to justify anti-Russian policies. Conversely, it may galvanize domestic and international criticism of Russia’s actions, as posts on X from early 2025 reflect polarized views on the memorandum’s relevance, with some users accusing Russia of betrayal and others dismissing the agreement as outdated.

Broader Context

The mention occurs amid heightened U.S.-Russia tensions, with the U.S. imposing sanctions (e.g., on Iran’s oil trade, affecting Russian interests indirectly) and escalating trade disputes with China, including over rare earth minerals. Russia, facing economic strain from sanctions and the war, is sensitive to Western moves that bolster Ukraine’s resilience. The agreement’s timing— during fragile peace talks and with Ukraine’s critical minerals (e.g., lithium, graphite) at stake— amplifies its significance. Russia’s own rare earth ambitions and control over occupied Ukrainian resources make the U.S.’s economic stake in Ukraine a direct challenge.

In summary, the Budapest Memorandum’s invocation in the agreement serves as a diplomatic rebuke to Russia, reinforcing U.S.-Ukraine partnership and Ukraine’s sovereignty. For Russia, it signals continued Western opposition, complicates peace efforts, and threatens economic exclusion, likely deepening Moscow’s resentment and strategic concerns.

Sources: Agreement text, web sources on Budapest Memorandum (e.g., Council on Foreign Relations, Arms Control Association), X posts on U.S.-Ukraine deal and Russia’s stance (March 2025).

 

[nikcers]

It gets us closer to a peace deal in Europe because it strengthens Ukraine's hand and it does so without costing the US taxpayer.

It's not like Trump didn't offer to force Ukraine's hand for a peace agreement but Russia outright refused it.

That deal is extremely favorable for Russia.

The borders would have been redrawn to favor Russia tremendously and the United States would have recognized it.

This deal that Trump made doesn't cost taxpayers any money and it won't cause any inflation.

It will actually serve to strengthen the dollar and the US economy

 

[PAF]

End The Ukraine War With This One Simple Trick​

by Daniel McAdams
May 1, 2025


The long-debated “minerals deal” was finally signed between the US and Ukraine late Wednesday, after a months-long, whiplash-producing back and forth between the two parties. In the end, Wednesday started with an affirmation that the deal would be signed, then by mid-day we were told that the Ukraine government aircraft turned around mid-flight and the deal was off, and then later in the afternoon the deal was finally actually signed. That is the chaos that is Trump 2.0 foreign policy in these early days of the Administration.

The “minerals deal” that was eventually signed was billed as a miraculous breakthrough, an amazing journey from the dramatic confrontation between the US president and vice president and Zelensky in the Oval Office just weeks ago, to the point where President Trump can raise high his trophy: the signed minerals deal for which an enormous amount of US diplomatic effort has been spent!

But the deal signed Wednesday in no way resembles the original “rare earths” deal touted by President Trump just a few weeks ago. Recall that when first launched this “deal” was a way for Ukraine to “pay back” the United States for $350 billion in assistance as calculated by the Trump people. The number is only accurate if one goes back to the US-backed coup in 2014, and, ironically, through the first Trump term (where for the first time offensive weapons were provided), and past the Biden largesse after Russia’s launch of its “special military operation” in February of 2022.

And it was a payback in the “rare earths” minerals said to be so critical to our technological society that had heretofore been supplied by “adversaries” like China for which many in the Trump foreign policy team were preparing to target as soon as they solved the Ukraine issue.

The great negotiator Trump was to secure the “rare earths” minerals from Ukraine that would for certainty be withheld or forbidden when the real strategy of “confronting” China was put into place.

But it’s all kabuki theater. First off, Trump people dropped the demand that US aid to Ukraine to the tune of a third of a trillion dollars needed to be paid back. That was the backbone and rationale of the deal in the first place. No, just days ago it was determined that we would start with a clean slate with Ukraine.

Once again – as with the “Liberation Day” tariff war – maximalist demands were made, proved incredibly disruptive, and then were inexplicably reversed suddenly days later.

“Just kidding.”

And now that the “minerals deal” was finally signed to great fanfare, it turns out that it was not about “rare earths” minerals at all. As Energy and commodities columnist at Bloomberg Javier Blas reported, after looking at the radically restructured “rare earths” deal posted on X, the “deal” is primarily about “oil, natural gas and a bit of aluminum.” He added, “And the critical minerals? Rare earths?”

Even the supposed harsh terms turn out to be a paper tiger:

– The US has no say under the agreement on when or what gets extracted in Ukraine
– Both countries invest equally into an ‘investment fund’
– No debts for past aid are acknowledged
– The US will not see a single dollar from the investment, in the best circumstances, for 10 YEARS

We’ve seen this movie before. Stealing oil from Syria and Iraq with negligible benefit to American citizens that was initially touted as a way to pay them back for our financing regime change wars. But only the well-connected Beltway parasites were well-paid.

The ludicrous “rare earths minerals deal” is a microcosm of how absurd the Trump Administration’s policy has been on the US/Russia war through proxy Ukraine in the first place.

One of the most dangerous and counter-productive additions to the new “minerals deal” is a provision that US military assistance shipped to Ukraine will go into the joint investment fund on the plus-side of the US ledger. In other words, this “breakthrough” has opened the door for the US to return to the Biden policy of endless weapons supplied to a nearly supine nation…with a promise to “pay you back” once minerals are extracted from what remains of Ukraine soil. This will serve to prolong the war that Trump claims he wants to end.

As longtime analyst Brian Berletic – with a solid track record of accuracy – wrote last week, “Today, the US government is attempting to play the role of a frustrated mediator trying to broker peace between Ukraine and Russia, when in reality this was always a war between the US and Russia.”

Perhaps driven by hubris and an obsession with vainglory, President Trump is desperate to be able to take credit for “solving” a completely fictional Ukraine/Russia war. Any doctor worth his salt would tell you that there is no way you can treat the disease if you misdiagnose the symptoms, but here we are with an Administration hypnotized by the neocon-created fantasy of a sudden attack – without antecedent – by Russia on its neighbor as a blatant land grab mixed equally with a desire to express bestial cruelty.

The only way they can sell this neocon fever dream is to reimagine Russian President Putin as a kind of golem-like figure who suddenly wakes up in the morning and decides who and how many to kill that day.

In fact this entire chapter of post-Cold War US foreign policy is defined by a desperate search for relatively easy dragons abroad to slay while sharpening our fangs to take down rival number two, Russia, with an eye on rival number one, an ascendant China.

But something happened on the road to unipolar victory: through the bad joke called NATO, the US threw everything in its arsenal short of nuclear weapons at Russia in Ukraine and it lost. In a United States thankfully defended by a wonderful geography of two protective oceans, it may be hard for our fellow citizens to understand what an existential war may look like.

Indeed, even WWII was a kind of crusade to save Europe from its own excesses. We were never threatened by Hitler or any of his riff-raff. Jews were totally safe in the US.

Russia on the other hand came to know up close and personal the murderous intent of the Nazis, and for the Soviet Union it was a matter of life and death – and we are talking tens of millions of lives – that savage Hitler with his view that Slavs were untermensch to be eliminated must be defeated.

Life or death. Americans have not faced that since, arguably, the Civil War.

So here we are in an absolutely AI kind of artificial reality where the early Trump 2.0 Administration is expending extraordinarily amounts of political, diplomatic, and other multi-layer efforts to maintain a fiction that Trump can wave his wand and remove animosity between Ukraine and Russia when all the time it was the US who was at war behind the shadows.

As the process becomes increasingly less attuned to the reality on the ground – thanks in large part to a reverse Walter Durranty-level fantasist called “General Kellogg” who for some bizarre reason continues to dominate the debate with his asinine “plan” published with neocon Fred Fleitz last April – Trump’s chimeric admonitions to his Russian counterpart to “just stop shooting” belie a kind of desperation that is doomed to fail. And he knows it.

Russia is fighting for its survival. Neocons are surfing on Ukrainian blood to “take down” Russia.

That’s it. That’s the war.

So how can President Trump square this ginormous circle and escape the traps and spider webs woven for him by all the neocons he has again hired to direct his foreign policy?

Ron Paul is often dismissed as jejune for his bons mots like “we just marched in we can just march home.” However in systems analysis many times it turns out that the simplest solution is the best solution. President Trump can end the war in Ukraine in a day (as he once promised) by simply announcing that it is not his war and he will no longer have anything to do with it.

That means no shuttle diplomacy with absurd plans, no more Steve Witkoff trafficking in Kellogg’s gilded turds. Simply a recognition of reality: literally no American who voted for Trump to save them from Biden’s inflation and woke tyranny could give a flying fornication who rules Ukraine or how it gets along with Russia. Polls back this idea as well.

To win Ukraine, Trump must wash his hands, Pontius Pilate-like, of the whole affair.

The neocons who have again steadied their swagger in Trump 2.0 love to revise the “peace through strength” mantra, as if they are the heirs of Reagan. But the real strength that brings on peace is the strength to stand up to all the Beltway neocons and desktop warriors and say, “enough.”

“This is not my war and I want to have nothing to do with it. Americans elected me to bring jobs to Middle America, not to pursue a crusade for the bloodthirsty neocon elite who fantasize of using American might to right all their perceived historical wrongs.”

America first is the real and only solution to the Ukraine problem.

End The Ukraine War With This One Simple Trick - The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity

This was adapted from an RPI subscriber update. Subscribe here for free and see it first. The long-debated "minerals deal" was finally signed between the US and Ukraine late Wednesday, after a months-long, whiplash-producing back and forth between the two parties. In the end, Wednesday started...

ronpaulinstitute.org

 

[TheTexan]

It's not like Trump didn't offer to force Ukraine's hand for a peace agreement but Russia outright refused it.

Putin put forward reasonable conditions to the ceasefire.

His conditions were not met.

 

[nikcers]

Putin put forward reasonable conditions to the ceasefire.

His conditions were not met.

His conditions were not reasonable.

It was a complete surrender of Ukrainian statehood.

That was his middle finger to the entire deal.

He said he would only take the deal if Ukraine surrendered their state completely to be governed under the United Nations.

Trump countered that offer and said well how about Ukraine hold elections so they can choose their government themselves.

Putin said no the Ukraine doesn't get to choose their government. They have to be occupied by the United Nations.

 

[nikcers]

End The Ukraine War With This One Simple Trick​

by Daniel McAdams
May 1, 2025


The long-debated “minerals deal” was finally signed between the US and Ukraine late Wednesday, after a months-long, whiplash-producing back and forth between the two parties. In the end, Wednesday started with an affirmation that the deal would be signed, then by mid-day we were told that the Ukraine government aircraft turned around mid-flight and the deal was off, and then later in the afternoon the deal was finally actually signed. That is the chaos that is Trump 2.0 foreign policy in these early days of the Administration.

The “minerals deal” that was eventually signed was billed as a miraculous breakthrough, an amazing journey from the dramatic confrontation between the US president and vice president and Zelensky in the Oval Office just weeks ago, to the point where President Trump can raise high his trophy: the signed minerals deal for which an enormous amount of US diplomatic effort has been spent!

But the deal signed Wednesday in no way resembles the original “rare earths” deal touted by President Trump just a few weeks ago. Recall that when first launched this “deal” was a way for Ukraine to “pay back” the United States for $350 billion in assistance as calculated by the Trump people. The number is only accurate if one goes back to the US-backed coup in 2014, and, ironically, through the first Trump term (where for the first time offensive weapons were provided), and past the Biden largesse after Russia’s launch of its “special military operation” in February of 2022.

And it was a payback in the “rare earths” minerals said to be so critical to our technological society that had heretofore been supplied by “adversaries” like China for which many in the Trump foreign policy team were preparing to target as soon as they solved the Ukraine issue.

The great negotiator Trump was to secure the “rare earths” minerals from Ukraine that would for certainty be withheld or forbidden when the real strategy of “confronting” China was put into place.

But it’s all kabuki theater. First off, Trump people dropped the demand that US aid to Ukraine to the tune of a third of a trillion dollars needed to be paid back. That was the backbone and rationale of the deal in the first place. No, just days ago it was determined that we would start with a clean slate with Ukraine.

Once again – as with the “Liberation Day” tariff war – maximalist demands were made, proved incredibly disruptive, and then were inexplicably reversed suddenly days later.

“Just kidding.”

And now that the “minerals deal” was finally signed to great fanfare, it turns out that it was not about “rare earths” minerals at all. As Energy and commodities columnist at Bloomberg Javier Blas reported, after looking at the radically restructured “rare earths” deal posted on X, the “deal” is primarily about “oil, natural gas and a bit of aluminum.” He added, “And the critical minerals? Rare earths?”

Even the supposed harsh terms turn out to be a paper tiger:



We’ve seen this movie before. Stealing oil from Syria and Iraq with negligible benefit to American citizens that was initially touted as a way to pay them back for our financing regime change wars. But only the well-connected Beltway parasites were well-paid.

The ludicrous “rare earths minerals deal” is a microcosm of how absurd the Trump Administration’s policy has been on the US/Russia war through proxy Ukraine in the first place.

One of the most dangerous and counter-productive additions to the new “minerals deal” is a provision that US military assistance shipped to Ukraine will go into the joint investment fund on the plus-side of the US ledger. In other words, this “breakthrough” has opened the door for the US to return to the Biden policy of endless weapons supplied to a nearly supine nation…with a promise to “pay you back” once minerals are extracted from what remains of Ukraine soil. This will serve to prolong the war that Trump claims he wants to end.

As longtime analyst Brian Berletic – with a solid track record of accuracy – wrote last week, “Today, the US government is attempting to play the role of a frustrated mediator trying to broker peace between Ukraine and Russia, when in reality this was always a war between the US and Russia.”

Perhaps driven by hubris and an obsession with vainglory, President Trump is desperate to be able to take credit for “solving” a completely fictional Ukraine/Russia war. Any doctor worth his salt would tell you that there is no way you can treat the disease if you misdiagnose the symptoms, but here we are with an Administration hypnotized by the neocon-created fantasy of a sudden attack – without antecedent – by Russia on its neighbor as a blatant land grab mixed equally with a desire to express bestial cruelty.

The only way they can sell this neocon fever dream is to reimagine Russian President Putin as a kind of golem-like figure who suddenly wakes up in the morning and decides who and how many to kill that day.

In fact this entire chapter of post-Cold War US foreign policy is defined by a desperate search for relatively easy dragons abroad to slay while sharpening our fangs to take down rival number two, Russia, with an eye on rival number one, an ascendant China.

But something happened on the road to unipolar victory: through the bad joke called NATO, the US threw everything in its arsenal short of nuclear weapons at Russia in Ukraine and it lost. In a United States thankfully defended by a wonderful geography of two protective oceans, it may be hard for our fellow citizens to understand what an existential war may look like.

Indeed, even WWII was a kind of crusade to save Europe from its own excesses. We were never threatened by Hitler or any of his riff-raff. Jews were totally safe in the US.

Russia on the other hand came to know up close and personal the murderous intent of the Nazis, and for the Soviet Union it was a matter of life and death – and we are talking tens of millions of lives – that savage Hitler with his view that Slavs were untermensch to be eliminated must be defeated.

Life or death. Americans have not faced that since, arguably, the Civil War.

So here we are in an absolutely AI kind of artificial reality where the early Trump 2.0 Administration is expending extraordinarily amounts of political, diplomatic, and other multi-layer efforts to maintain a fiction that Trump can wave his wand and remove animosity between Ukraine and Russia when all the time it was the US who was at war behind the shadows.

As the process becomes increasingly less attuned to the reality on the ground – thanks in large part to a reverse Walter Durranty-level fantasist called “General Kellogg” who for some bizarre reason continues to dominate the debate with his asinine “plan” published with neocon Fred Fleitz last April – Trump’s chimeric admonitions to his Russian counterpart to “just stop shooting” belie a kind of desperation that is doomed to fail. And he knows it.

Russia is fighting for its survival. Neocons are surfing on Ukrainian blood to “take down” Russia.

That’s it. That’s the war.

So how can President Trump square this ginormous circle and escape the traps and spider webs woven for him by all the neocons he has again hired to direct his foreign policy?

Ron Paul is often dismissed as jejune for his bons mots like “we just marched in we can just march home.” However in systems analysis many times it turns out that the simplest solution is the best solution. President Trump can end the war in Ukraine in a day (as he once promised) by simply announcing that it is not his war and he will no longer have anything to do with it.

That means no shuttle diplomacy with absurd plans, no more Steve Witkoff trafficking in Kellogg’s gilded turds. Simply a recognition of reality: literally no American who voted for Trump to save them from Biden’s inflation and woke tyranny could give a flying fornication who rules Ukraine or how it gets along with Russia. Polls back this idea as well.

To win Ukraine, Trump must wash his hands, Pontius Pilate-like, of the whole affair.

The neocons who have again steadied their swagger in Trump 2.0 love to revise the “peace through strength” mantra, as if they are the heirs of Reagan. But the real strength that brings on peace is the strength to stand up to all the Beltway neocons and desktop warriors and say, “enough.”

“This is not my war and I want to have nothing to do with it. Americans elected me to bring jobs to Middle America, not to pursue a crusade for the bloodthirsty neocon elite who fantasize of using American might to right all their perceived historical wrongs.”

America first is the real and only solution to the Ukraine problem.

End The Ukraine War With This One Simple Trick - The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity

This was adapted from an RPI subscriber update. Subscribe here for free and see it first. The long-debated "minerals deal" was finally signed between the US and Ukraine late Wednesday, after a months-long, whiplash-producing back and forth between the two parties. In the end, Wednesday started...

ronpaulinstitute.org

Well that's a slight misrepresentation of World War 2 with the Jews. You see the jews didn't have anywhere to go.

When they asked the USA for asylum the United States refused.

Trump got the best deal that he could. It business terms it was money on the table. It's these types of deals that are going to help pay for his historic tax cuts.

 

[Snowball]