BEN MORGAN: Trump’s ‘handbrake turn’ towards Ukraine – What does it mean?

Ukraine’s situation changed last week, a result of the White House’s new position regarding support. The rare minerals deal was a catalyst for a sudden ‘handbrake turn,’ that may ‘switch on’ more military support for Ukraine.

The reasons for the shift, are impossible to confirm. Perhaps President Trump had a moment of epiphany speaking to President Zelensky at the Vatican last week, or Putin stalled too long. We do not know, and are unlikely too. Instead, we should consider what this change could mean for the war because it indicates a hardening of US attitudes, and an acceptance that the war is not a ‘quick fix.’ A more realistic attitude that may put more pressure on Putin.

The rare mineral deal is signed, Trump has a mandate to support Ukraine

After months of discussion and negotiation, US Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent and Ukraine’s First Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko signed the ‘Establishment of a United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund’ last week, on 30 April. A partnership agreement giving the US preferential access to Ukraine’s oil, gas, and rare mineral deposits.

This deal revolves around rare minerals like graphite, titanium and lithium that are in demand by the tech industry. China currently extracts most of the world’s supply of these minerals. A strategic weakness for the Trump administration that is keen to compete with China. Ukraine is believed to have an abundance of rare minerals, providing a bargaining ‘chip’ that Zelensky has used very effectively.

The genesis of the agreement was in Zelensky’s plan for victory presented in October 2024, before the US election. Clearly, Zelensky understood the risk of Trump winning the election, and mitigated it by presenting an opportunity to commercialise the aid discussion.

Zelensky’s proposal provided revenue for the US, and a way to pay for aid. An idea Zelensky clearly pitched at Trump’s commercial, transactional worldview. If the US would not support Ukraine for philosophical reasons, they might for commercial gain or to reduce dependence on Chinese supplies of rare minerals. Secondly, a commercial deal provided the Trump White House with a way to justify supporting Ukraine to their MAGA political base, that does not support US involvement in foreign wars.

However, Zelensky had a long and tortuous negotiation process to manage. Trump initially demanded that Ukraine repay “US$ 500 billion” of military aid that he stated America had already provided. Further, the initial proposal locked Ukraine into a coercive; commercial regime described by the Guardian in the following terms; “The plan appeared to lock Ukraine into all kinds of obligations, while offering Kyiv nothing in return by way of security guarantees, save the rather thin claim that Washington taking a stake in Ukraine’s economy was itself a kind of security guarantee.”

A bad deal for Ukraine, and a process that almost collapsed when Zelensky was publicly and boorishly berated by the Vice President and other US officials during a visit to the Oval Office.

But Zelensky ‘kept his cool,’ maintained his dignity and kept negotiating.

And, the final agreement indicates the White House’s position has softened towards Ukraine. Essentially, Ukraine and the US will split the profit from the any new oil, gas or rare mineral extraction equally. Tymofiy Mylovanov, president of the Kyiv School of Economics, describing the situation on X, as follows “Ukraine held the line. Despite enormous pressure, every overreaching demand from the other side was dropped. The final deal looks fair.”

Mylovanov’s assessment appears reasonable, the agreement establishing an equitable partnership. It is focused on reconstruction, and names Russia as the aggressor. Objective Two reading “The Agreement strengthens the strategic partnership between the Parties for the long-term reconstruction and modernization of Ukraine, in response to the large-scale destruction caused by Russia`’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and in pursuit of a peaceful, sovereign, and resilient Ukraine.” The agreement is also clear to state that Russia should not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine. A significant difference from previous US statements, that to-date, have avoided discussing culpability

Additionally, the agreement supports Ukraine’s plan to join the European Union, stating “the USA acknowledges Ukraine’s intention to avoid conflicts in the drafting of this Agreement with Ukraine’s obligations related to European Union accession,” and proposes that if there are problems the US and Ukraine can negotiate them in ‘good faith.’

In summary, the rare mineral agreement provides Ukraine, and its supporters around the world with a reason to be cautiously optimistic.

What are the potential implications on US support for Ukraine?

The impact of the agreement on direct US support is hard to gauge, it is economically focussed and makes no security commitments, but it does provide opportunities for more US support. The question is whether the White House will use them, and commentators have mixed opinions. Retired Australian general, Mick Ryan is cautious in his assessment stating in a recent Substack article that “The deal is likely to have a minor impact on the trajectory of the war. While it might make Trump slightly more inclined to assist Ukraine with its defence, we should not over analyse the strategic impact of this deal.” Another Ukraine war commentator, Anders Puck Nielsen on the other hand is more optimistic in his recent review. See it here –

Therefore, considering the impact of the agreement from a military perspective the key points can be summarised as follows:

Ukraine is not expected to pay for historic military aid.

Initially, Trump strongly advocated for Ukraine to repay US military aid previously provided by the Biden administration. However, the agreement has changed this policy and does not require Ukraine to pay anything towards historic military aid. The expectation appears to be that the financial benefits of the partnership can be used to fund continuation of the war if required.

US military aid may still be on the table.

The agreement does not discuss aid but US statements describe the agreement as an essential start-point for any future discussion. Svyrydenko has discussed the agreement providing a basis for new US aid, specifically air defence.

Additionally, the US recently acknowledged two recent sales of military equipment to Ukraine. The day after the rare minerals deal was signed, the White House notified Congress of a proposal to sell US$ 50 million of military equipment to Ukraine. The notification did not include details of the equipment, but is the first such transaction since Trump took office.

Reuters reported on 3 May that the US State Department has approved US$ 310 billion deal for Ukraine to buy F-16 parts and training from the US. The rare mineral deal provides Ukraine with structured approach for US investment that will provide income that can be used to fund the war. It is likely that the White House’s favourable terms are predicated on Ukraine using those profits to buy American weapons.

Further, the agreement allows for US military aid like ammunition, weapons systems, or training to be counted as a capital contribution to the partnership. The US holds vast reserves of equipment, aircraft, armoured vehicles, and ammunition. This provision provides an easy option to increase the supply of US military aid by donating these stocks to Ukraine, and recording their value as a ‘capital contribution.’

But there are no US security guarantees.

Unfortunately for Ukraine, the agreement does not provide a direct security guarantee.

Mineral extraction requires local security. No mining or drilling means no money, and these activities can only happen in areas secure from attack. An important point that could reduce the military impact of the deal, or may provide a reason for greater US aid.

Profitable extraction of Ukrainian resources requires a level of security and stability. It is not a huge leap of imagination to picture American oil, mining and defence industry lobbyists advocating for a rapid end to the conflict. The defence industry providing the mechanisms to deliver through the agreement, Ukraine receiving US weapons as a contribution to the partnership’s capital.

In summary, it is a cliché but this agreement could be a ‘win-win’ for the US and Ukraine. Zelensky has been open about Ukraine’s desire to purchase weapons directly from the US, as recently as 13 April proposing the direct purchase of 10 Patriot air defence batteries. Already, the White House has confirmed two weapons deals worth US $ 360 million, so it is not unreasonable to believe there will be more.

The rare minerals agreement potentially provides a guaranteed revenue stream to achieve this goal. The US defence industry profiting from producing and selling weapons, while Ukraine gets the tools it needs to defeat Russia.

What are the implications for Russia’s invasion?

Although Putin’s initial response to the agreement being signed was to bomb residential areas in Odessa, his bullishness is probably misplaced. The deal makes his position more difficult by providing an avenue for US military support, that Trump can justify to his political base because the US is profiting from it.

And, Russia’s campaign is far from where Putin needs it to be, the Russian armoured Battalion Tactical Groups that swarmed over Ukraine are gone. Russia’s tanks, armoured vehicles and trucks lost during the war and not replaced Now Russian infantry grind incrementally forwards using shockingly expensive Storm Z tactics. Russia has spent the last year sacrificing young soldier’s lives trying to force a collapse of the Ukrainian frontline, or to capture an operationally significant area, like Pokrovsk or Constantynivka and failed consistently.

Recent casualty reports from Ukraine, and the UK Ministry of Defence indicate that monthly Russian casualties are increasing. This year alone the UK Ministry of Defence estimates that Russia has lost 160,000 soldiers killed or seriously wounded, 40,000 per month. And, after sustaining such staggering losses, Russia is still far from achieving their goal. Ukraine, on the other hand stated that its goal was to inflict attrition on Russia, and it appears to be succeeding.

The agreement is important in terms of wider strategy because it ratchets up pressure on Putin. It isolates him and prepares the US for a long war, Putin’s worst fear.

Conclusion

The US change of course is important, and there is cause for Ukraine and its supporters to be optimistic. On the ground, Russia is not making progress, its latest offensive is stalled and now US support may increase.

Essentially, it appears that the Trump administration accepts their engagement in Ukraine is likely to be long-term, and the Establishment of a United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund agreement is tool to facilitate that engagement with minimum impact on the US. A minimal level of cost-neutral engagement that will maintain European defence relationships without committing the US to direct intervention. And, depending on events the US can also use the agreement to increase or decrease support to Ukraine.

At this stage, Putin’s relationship with Trump may allow him to negotiate a deal. It would be sensible to stop, even just to preserve or rebuild Russia’s military. But looking at his record it seems more likely that he will ‘double down’ make more threats, mobilise more soldiers and keep fighting.

Unfortunately, my assessment is that the war will continue for the foreseeable future. However, the rare minerals agreement means there is a greater chance Ukraine will shorten the war by defeating Russia more quickly. The rare mineral agreement may not be the fulsome US support Ukraine and its supporters want, but it is something.

 

 

 

 

Ben Morgan is a bored Gen Xer, a former Officer in NZDF and TDBs Military Blogger – his work is on substack