Follow us on social

Diplomacy Watch Donald Trump Putin Zelensky

Diplomacy Watch: Trump and Zelensky announce Minerals deal

Russia, US look to strengthen ties despite shaky peace talks

Analysis | QiOSK

In a major diplomatic development, the long-awaited Ukraine minerals deal, where Ukraine would give the U.S. access to its mineral deposits in exchange for previous wartime U.S. support and post-war Ukraine rebuilding, is set to be signed late next week.

Indeed, Ukraine and the U.S. signed a "memorandum of intent" late Thursday on the deal, which advances the deal but falls short of a final, fully agreed upon one.

“We have a minerals deal which I guess is going to be signed [next] Thursday,” Trump said Thursday at a White House meeting with visiting Italian PM Giorgia Meloni. “And I assume they’re going to live up to the deal.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky also said Thursday that a minerals deal with the U.S. could be finalized imminently.

This came on the heels of comments he made the day before. The basic legal stuff [for a deal] is almost finalized, and then, if everything moves as quickly and constructively, the agreement will bring economic results to both our countries,” Zelensky explained.

State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce, when asked at the daily briefing, said she couldn’t provide more information about the deal. What is known, however, is that Washington has softened its demands for one. In this respect, a source told Agence France-Press that recent drafts of the agreement did not cite previous U.S. military aid to Ukraine as a debt it would need to pay off.

That doesn’t mean Trump is totally happy with Kyiv. “I don’t hold Zelensky responsible but I’m not exactly thrilled with the fact that war started,” Trump said Thursday. “I wouldn’t say he’s done the greatest job.”

Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Donald Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff arrived in Paris Thursday for high-level talks with European officials and — previously unannounced — Ukrainian diplomats.

After continued fears of diplomatic shut out, Ukrainian and European officials alike hope the Paris talks steer ongoing war negotiations in their favor. "Everyone wants to get peace. A robust and sustainable peace. The question is about phasing,” French President Emmanuel Macron said.

"What's important is that we have started a process in Paris today that is positive and where the Europeans are associated," a senior adviser to Macron told reporters Thursday.

Other diplomatic efforts remain challenging; participants remain optimistic about prospects for improved U.S.-Russia relations, if not a negotiated political solution to end the conflict altogether.

In an April 14 Fox News interview, Witkoff called his in-person meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin late last week “compelling.” He concluded from it that Russia was open to a “permanent peace,” but admitted that negotiations remained complex.

“There’s security protocols. There’s ‘no NATO,’ ‘NATO,’ article 5…it’s a complicated situation…rooted in some real problematic things happening between the two countries,” he explained.

“We might be on the verge of something that would be very, very important for the world at large,” Witkoff said. “On top of that, I believe there’s a possibility to reshape the Russian-United States relationship through some very compelling commercial opportunities that I think give real stability to the region too.”

Albeit less optimistic than Witkoff about peace prospects, Russian officials likewise expressed support for strengthening U.S.-Russia ties.

“Reviving relations practically from scratch is a very difficult matter, it requires very intense diplomatic and other efforts,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov explained, saying “everything is moving very well” in an interview with Russian journalist Pavel Zarubin.

“But here, we just need to understand how serious the damage was done to bilateral Russian-American relations under the [Biden] administration” Peskov noted. “In reality, the situation is slightly different, it is much more complex, requires more work, requires more time.”

In other Ukraine war news this week:

According to Daily Mail, Russia is building military infrastructure along its border with Finland, which joined NATO after the start of the Ukraine war. “During the war there were about 20,000 soldiers stationed and about four standby brigades, now we see that Russia is building new infrastructure and as soon as they can, more troops in this region,” Lieutenant General Vesa Virtanen, Finland's Deputy Chief of Defense, said about the development.

Virtanen warned that Russia was “deliberately testing NATO's unity” with the infrastructure development, perhaps also testing whether it would trigger Article 5, NATO’s collective defense clause.

According to the Economist, Pentagon officials questioned an unnamed European ally about its continued military assistance to Ukraine, in addition to saying they are privately “fed up” about Europe’s continued Ukraine aid efforts amid the administration’s diplomatic strides toward Moscow.


Two Russian missiles hit the Ukrainian city of Sumy on Sunday, according to CNN, killing at least 35 people and wounding 117 others.

From State Department Press Briefing on April 17

At an April 17 State Department press briefing, State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce emphasized the need for a negotiated solution to the Ukraine war — as soon as possible. “President Donald Trump has been clear: this madness has to come to an end, quickly and completely. During his recent visit to NATO. Secretary Rubio also noted that the time for peace is now: not in months or years. It is now.”

Bruce echoed Trump’s belief that the war would not have happened under his watch. “Trump’s vision and demand for an end to the hostilities remains a north star for Secretary Rubio, Ambassador Witkoff, Special Presidential Envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg, and so many others who are determined to make clear to everyone around the world that the Russia-Ukraine war would never have happened if President Trump had been president at the time.”


Top Photo Credit: Diplomacy Watch (Khody Akhavi)
Analysis | QiOSK
US Marines
Top image credit: U.S. Marines with Force Reconnaissance Platoon, Maritime Raid Force, 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, prepare to clear a room during a limited scale raid exercise at Sam Hill Airfield, Queensland, Australia, June 21, 2025. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Alora Finigan)

Cartels are bad but they're not 'terrorists.' This is mission creep.

Military Industrial Complex

There is a dangerous pattern on display by the Trump administration. The president and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth seem to hold the threat and use of military force as their go-to method of solving America’s problems and asserting state power.

The president’s reported authorization for the Pentagon to use U.S. military warfighting capacity to combat drug cartels — a domain that should remain within the realm of law enforcement — represents a significant escalation. This presents a concerning evolution and has serious implications for civil liberties — especially given the administration’s parallel moves with the deployment of troops to the southern border, the use of federal forces to quell protests in California, and the recent deployment of armed National Guard to the streets of our nation’s capital.

keep readingShow less
Howard Lutnick
Top photo credit: Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on CNBC, 8/26/25 (CNBC screengrab)

Is nationalizing the defense industry such a bad idea?

Military Industrial Complex

The U.S. arms industry is highly consolidated, specialized, and dependent on government contracts. Indeed, the largest U.S. military contractors are already effectively extensions of the state — and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is right to point that out.

His suggestion in a recent media appearance to partially nationalize the likes of Lockheed Martin is hardly novel. The economist John Kenneth Galbraith argued for the nationalization of the largest military contractors in 1969. More recently, various academics and policy analysts have advocated for partial or full nationalization of military firms in publications including The Nation, The American Conservative, The Middle East Research and Information Project (MERIP), and The Seattle Journal for Social Justice.

keep readingShow less
Modi Trump
Top image credit: White House, February 2025

Trump's India problem could become a Global South crisis

Asia-Pacific

As President Trump’s second term kicked off, all signs pointed to a continued upswing in U.S.-India relations. At a White House press conference in February, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke of his vision to “Make India Great Again” and how the United States under Trump would play a central role. “When it’s MAGA plus MIGA, it becomes a mega partnership for prosperity,” Modi said.

During Trump’s first term, the two populist leaders hosted rallies for each other in their respective countries and cultivated close personal ties. Aside from the Trump-Modi bromance, U.S.-Indian relations have been on a positive trajectory for over two decades, driven in part by mutual suspicion of China. But six months into his second term, Trump has taken several actions that have led to a dramatic downturn in U.S.-India relations, with India-China relations suddenly on the rise.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.