The Deal, in Plain Terms
It’s being called the United States–Ukraine Reinvestment Fund. That’s the formal name. Underneath that umbrella, the deal gives U.S. companies preferential access to Ukraine’s mineral and energy reserves, mostly lithium, rare earths, and oil and gas still under the ground. In return, the U.S. commits to keeping aid flowing, military and economic, with a chunk of future resource revenues earmarked for rebuilding infrastructure and, supposedly, joint projects.
It’s not a treaty. Technically, it’s an intergovernmental framework agreement backed by letters of intent from both governments and a draft investment protocol. So far, no legally binding contracts as those will come later after Ukraine’s Parliament ratifies it. That vote is likely, but not guaranteed.
The ownership caps? U.S. firms can take majority stakes in mining and extraction ventures, but not outright control of sovereign assets. Kyiv keeps 50% of the net proceeds from state-owned mineral operations. No royalties were disclosed, at least not in the version that leaked to the Ukrainian press.
One line in the summary stood out: “maximum permissible private equity participation under applicable U.S. law.” Which could mean a lot or very little, depending on what gets carved out through regulation.
Who Governs This Fund? Good Question.
There’s a board, kind of. Equal representation from the U.S. and Ukraine, according to people familiar with the draft charter. No formal roles yet for outside auditors or civil society watchdogs, although one U.S. official said “governance protections” would be added before the deployment of funds. The plan is for the board to approve and oversee project investments starting with basic infrastructure (roads, power, water), and then in energy and mining development.
Still no word on whether U.S. development finance institutions like the DFC or EXIM Bank will participate. But they’re watching the developments.
FIGURE 1: Critical Raw Materials Map of Ukraine
What’s in the Ground and Who’s Interested
Ukraine’s critical minerals reserves have been mapped, but mostly sit idle. The Shevchenkivske lithium deposit in Donetsk Oblast is one of the largest in Europe. It’s been off-limits since 2014. The Dobra and Kruta Balka sites near Kirovohrad, which hold graphite and rare earths, are reportedly safer.
So far, no companies have been named in official documents. But several are in talks, including mining firms with exposure in Central Europe and defense contractors with mineral supply interests. The defense angle matters more than people think, as rare earths like neodymium and dysprosium are key to missile guidance, sonar, and drone systems.
There’s speculation that Albemarle (NYSE: ALB) and MP Materials (NYSE: MP) have sent exploratory teams, though neither has confirmed anything. European players like Eramet (ENXTPA: ERA) could also move in if EU partnerships are allowed. Right now, this is being framed as a bilateral U.S.-Ukraine deal. The EU is watching from the sidelines.
Politics. War. Risk.
Parliament is the first hurdle. Ukraine’s legislature has killed similar deals before and especially ones involving state-owned resources. The pro-EU Holos party supports it. Some opposition blocs have warned against “recolonization by capital,” their words, not ours. Timing the vote right matters. Too close to an election or another Russian offensive and it could stall.
And then there’s the war. The front lines aren’t stable. Some deposits, including lithium and titanium reserves in the east, are within 100 kilometers of active fighting. A breakthrough by Russian forces is unlikely, but not impossible, and could change the whole economic map.
One risk analyst called it “the Afghanistan lithium scenario.” Valuable resources, high potential, zero security.
What’s Missing in the Deal
The transparency provisions are weak so far. Ukraine has pledged to strengthen governance, “ongoing adjustments,” is how Economy Minister Yulia Svyrydenko put it, but nothing’s finalized. U.S. anti-corruption watchdogs want real-time audits and third-party validators. That hasn’t been agreed to yet.
No ESG clause has been published either. No mention of environmental permitting or community consultation. Not ideal. That’ll slow down private capital until it’s sorted.
No timeline for when the extraction starts. Optimistically? Exploration in late 2025. Production, maybe 2027 if the war calms and permitting moves fast. That’s the best case. Investors looking for 12-month gains probably need to sit this one out.
The China Factor
Nobody’s saying it out loud, but this could be partly a play to reduce China’s grip on global critical minerals. China processes over 85% of the world’s rare earths. The U.S. wants alternatives. Ukraine, with enough capital and post-war stability, could offer one. If this deal helps fund that vision, it gives Washington strategic leverage, whether or not mining ever actually takes off.
So What’s This Really About?
It’s not just aid repayment. Or economic development. This is a hedge. The U.S. is locking in a future piece of Ukraine’s recovery, potentially benefiting U.S. companies and investors, but definitely to keep Ukraine in its orbit. For Kyiv, it’s access to capital without giving up full control of its resources.
For investors, this is a long-duration, high-risk play tied to war outcomes, government follow-through, and the speed of post-conflict reconstruction. There’s an upside, but no floor.
A U.S. official summed it up last week, off the record, “We’re betting on Ukraine’s recovery. But we’re not waiting for peace to get started.” That’s a signal.
Related content:
- PDAC 2025 – Technical Program – The Next Big Moves In Commodities: The Future Trends Shaping Our World
- PDAC 2025 – Commodity Outlook Keynote – Mike Henry of BHP
- INDUSTRY REPORT: Mining Royalty and Streaming Companies: A Low-Risk Path to Mining Exposure
Notes: All numbers in CAD unless otherwise stated. The author of this report, and employees, consultants, and family of eResearch may own stock positions in companies mentioned in this article and may have been paid by a company mentioned in the article or research report. eResearch offers no representations or warranties that any of the information contained in this article is accurate or complete. Articles on eresearch.com are provided for general informational purposes only and do not constitute financial, investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice nor does it constitute an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities referred to. Individual circumstances and current events are critical to sound investment planning; anyone wishing to act on this information should consult with a financial advisor. The article may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. Forward-looking statements are based on the opinions and assumptions of the Company’s management as of the date made. They are inherently susceptible to uncertainty and other factors that could cause actual events/results to differ materially from these forward-looking statements. Additional risks and uncertainties, including those that the Company does not know about now or that it currently deems immaterial, may also adversely affect the Company’s business or any investment therein. Any projections given are principally intended for use as objectives and are not intended, and should not be taken, as assurances that the projected results will be obtained by the Company. The assumptions used may not prove to be accurate and a potential decline in the Company’s financial condition or results of operations may negatively impact the value of its securities. Please read eResearch’s full disclaimer.
