How the US tried to push a burdensome resource deal on Ukraine and why it failed
At the end of last week, Munich became the stage where the world order is being shaped. It wasn’t just because of Vice President JD Vance’s speech, in which he declared an end to the era of shared US-European values and openly backed far-right forces in European politics.
As shocked European leaders scrambled to respond to this new reality, the US turned its attention to pressuring Ukraine. The White House demanded that Ukraine immediately agree to their version of a mineral resources deal in exchange for aid – otherwise, they threatened, a meeting with Vance would not go ahead. But the pressure stopped after Kyiv refused, and the meeting took place anyway.
Read more aboute how Ukraine withstood the pressure and what happens next in the article by Sergiy Sydorenko, European Pravda's editor – Trump's billion-dollar bargain: how the US pressured Ukraine and why the deal collapsed.
The US-Ukraine talks on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference were set to be held on Friday morning, 14 February. Everything was ready. Vance had arrived, Ukrainian officials were filtering in, security had even started letting in Ukrainian journalists. Then suddenly everyone was told that the meeting was postponed indefinitely.
But in Munich the US issued an ultimatum: if Ukraine wanted a meeting with Vance to discuss the framework for peace, it had to sign the deal. Immediately.
Zelenskyy had to either sign what Washington had drafted or forget about meeting Vance. The meeting was only possible "as part of a package", with the signing of the deal. Kyiv had only seen the draft agreement two days earlier. Finalising a strategic intergovernmental deal with major economic implications in just 48 hours was impossible. Ukraine had never planned to sign the document so soon. The negotiations had only just begun. So how could there be talk of a "refusal"?
But Zelenskyy held firm and refused to sign the document on the White House’s terms. Crucially, the beneficiaries on the American side would not be the US government but private investors.
The harshness and pressure from US negotiators vanished as if by magic. The demand to sign the agreement was quietly dropped, and the meeting with Vance went ahead as if nothing had happened. In fact, it turned out to be quite successful.
For now, though, it seems that the business wing of Trump’s administration was attempting to exploit Ukraine’s vulnerability to force it into an unfavourable deal.
When it became clear that Kyiv wouldn’t cave, they backed off.
Officially, Zelenskyy and Vance agreed to continue working on the draft agreement.
The resource deal negotiations may have ended in failure, but the peace talks in Munich delivered more than anyone expected.
Vance himself outlined a position identical to Ukraine’s: "We want the killing to stop, but we want to achieve a durable, lasting peace, not the kind of peace that’s going to have Eastern Europe in conflict just a couple of years down the road."
In reality, a lasting peace in Ukraine is just as crucial for the White House as it is for Zelenskyy. Hopefully Washington has finally grasped this reality.
Vance is even more invested in ensuring stability, because he is personally negotiating these deals. It’s an open secret that Vance wants to be the next US president.
The coming weeks will bring difficult negotiations, starting with US-Russia and US-Ukraine talks in Saudi Arabia and Ukraine itself.
Meanwhile, another process is unfolding which is of great benefit to Ukraine.
Europe is deeply alarmed about being sidelined from the Russia-US peace talks, and about the fracturing of its partnership with Washington, especially after Vance’s controversial Munich speech.
This gathering will effectively be a "Coalition of Resolute States" – those committed to real support for Ukraine.
"It feels like Europe has finally woken up. Now we’re waiting for unity and decisive action," one Ukrainian diplomat said of the Munich conference’s outcome.