On June 16, the Ukrainian government initiated the bidding process for foreign companies to exploit lithium deposits within its borders, signaling a significant step in its mineral wealth strategy. Among the bidders is a consortium linked to Ronald S Lauder, who is reportedly associated with United States President Donald Trump.
This tender is tied to a minerals agreement signed earlier in April, which is designed to facilitate U.S. access to Ukraine’s considerable geological assets. The deal, characterized by Trump as a form of “payback” for U.S. military support to Ukraine, has sparked discussions about the implications of such foreign involvement in a nation actively engaged in conflict.
The finalized document is hailed by the Ukrainian government as being “more favorable” than prior versions, offering a pathway for U.S. investment in Ukraine’s mining and energy sectors. Under the agreement, decision-making regarding investments will be a cooperative effort between U.S. and Ukrainian officials, with notable benefits including tax exemptions on profits and preferential treatment for American firms in public tenders.
Critics argue that Trump’s push for access to Ukraine’s mineral resources represents an infringement on Ukraine’s sovereignty, particularly unsettling during a time when the country is navigating a war and relies heavily on U.S. military supplies. This situation is not seen as an isolated incident; rather, it fits a pattern of Western pressures on Ukraine to undertake decisions that may not align with the interests of its citizens.
One prominent aspect of Western influence has been linked to Hunter Biden, the son of current U.S. President Joe Biden. Following the ousting of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych in early 2014, Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian natural gas firm. At that time, Joe Biden was vice president under Barack Obama and played a key role in U.S.-Ukrainian relations.
Over a five-year period, Hunter earned up to $50,000 a month, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest that even stirred concerns among Ukraine’s European partners. Furthermore, Joe Biden’s involvement intensified, as he reportedly pressured then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to dismiss the prosecutor general, using U.S. aid as leverage.
Once Biden assumed the presidency, his administration, alongside the European Union, applied pressure on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to appoint foreign “experts” to pivotal roles in the selection of judges for Ukrainian courts. This resulted in a foreign influence over the Ethics Council of the High Council of Justice, which oversees judicial vetting in Ukraine, further complicating domestic matters and prompting internal dissent.
Zelenskyy’s governance has seen the adoption of several unpopular laws under external pressure, most notably in 2020 when the parliament passed legislation allowing the sale of private farmland. Despite public opposition, and following widespread protests that were largely stifled by COVID-19 restrictions, the move facilitated an increased dominance of large multinational companies in Ukraine’s agricultural sector, jeopardizing local food security.
Attempts to contest these controversial laws were met with judicial pushback. For instance, the Kyiv District Administrative Court deemed a judicial reform law unconstitutional, which was countered by Zelenskyy’s move to dissolve the court following U.S. sanctions imposed on its chief judge over corrupt practices.
With noticeable Western interference in Ukraine’s governance, public trust in the nation’s sovereignty has eroded significantly. A 2021 survey indicated that nearly 40 percent of Ukrainians doubted their country’s full independence from external manipulation.
Parallel to these governance issues, Ukraine’s economy has experienced its fair share of foreign pressures. In 2016, U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt advocated for Ukraine to develop into an “agricultural superpower.” This shift has contributed to a noticeable deindustrialization trend within the country.
From 2010 to 2019, the proportion of Ukraine’s gross domestic product attributed to industry diminished by 3.7 percentage points, while agriculture saw an increase of 3.4 percentage points. However, this transformation did not serve the interests of the Ukrainian populace; UNICEF reported that from 2018 to 2020, around 20 percent of Ukrainians faced “moderate to severe food insecurity,” a statistic that escalated to 28 percent by 2022.
The agricultural sector’s expansion has favored the cultivation of export-oriented monocrops, including sunflowers, corn, and soybeans, which has harmed local food production. While Ukraine ascended to the position of the world’s leading exporter of sunflower oil in 2019, a 2021 study found that intensive monoculture practices threatened 40 percent of the country’s soil with depletion.
The 2016 free trade agreement with the EU further complicated Ukraine’s economic landscape, as it encouraged low-cost agricultural exports while imposing constraints that hindered domestic products from gaining access to European markets. Consequently, Ukraine reported a trade deficit of 4 billion euros with the EU in 2021, exporting raw materials while importing processed goods and machinery.
This economic trajectory has devastated Ukraine’s industrial output, with significant declines reported in various sectors by 2019: automobile production fell to 31 percent of its 2012 levels, while other key industries such as machinery, metallurgy, and agricultural machinery production saw similar downturns.
In 2020, the newly elected government under Zelenskyy attempted to pass legislation aimed at safeguarding domestic industry through Bill 3739, which sought to limit foreign goods in state contracts. However, the bill faced immediate backlash from the EU, the U.S., and local pro-Western NGOs, highlighting the discrepancy in how Western nations protect their markets compared to Ukraine’s experience.
Ultimately, Bill 3739 was passed but with amendments that favored American and European companies, limiting its intended protective measures for local industries.
Recent moves by the EU to renew tariffs on Ukrainian agricultural exports, which had been temporarily lifted, exemplify the ongoing challenges facing Ukrainian agriculture amidst Western interference. Officials express concerns that these tariffs could significantly reduce the anticipated economic growth, from 2.7 percent to 0.9 percent, costing the nation approximately $3.5 billion in lost income.
In conclusion, the recent push by Trump for access to Ukraine’s mineral resources underscores a continuity of Western policy towards Ukraine rather than a decisive break. What differentiates Trump’s approach is the stark visibility of the pressure applied by Western leaders, which typically occurs away from the public eye.
image source from：aljazeera
