The very public disagreement at the White House between President Trump and President Zelensky last month came out of a meeting focused on the countries signing a rare earth and minerals deal. Arbnor Bajraliu and Cristian Nitoiu write that while it might seem that Trump’s focus and more coercive negotiation strategy is solely on Ukraine, in reality, it is broader and more strategic and is part of a larger effort to reduce US dependency on Chinese exports of rare earth minerals.

The spat between Presidents Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office at the end of February captured headlines around the world. It made great TV, as Trump boasted, but it also emphasized a key priority for the US. The meeting between the two presidents focused on signing a rare earth and minerals deal through which the two countries would be economically linked. Trump’s interest in rare earths seems to have come out of the blue, but in fact, the Ukrainian leadership previously floated this idea to the Biden administration. Trump has presented the deal as a way for the US to recoup the alleged $350 billion that it has sent to Ukraine in aid.

Minerals for US, closer economic ties for Ukraine

Ukraine is considered to be rich in in natural resources, some of which are seen as critical for US technological progress. The recent agreement will provide the US access to these resources, while ensuring that America will play a key role in the reconstruction of Ukraine. Even though it will be through the Reconstruction Investment Fund, where both the US and Ukraine will invest, the text of the agreement is very broad and general. Ukraine is not receiving its much-desired security guarantees from the US, but from Trump’s perspective, strengthening economic ties can play a similar role in deterring Russia.

While it might seem that Trump’s focus is solely on Ukraine, the reality is broader and more strategic. Rare earth elements are critical for various high-tech industries, including electric vehicle production and artificial intelligence. The global demand for these elements is increasing fast, and China holds a dominant position by producing 60 percent of the world’s rare earths and processing around 85 percent of them, making almost every country very reliant on China for this component. The US and Europe have been slow out of the gates in recognizing the future importance of control over rare earth minerals. This has allowed China to create, during the last decade, a foothold in the global value chains associated with rare earths, which has increased its geopolitical leverage around the world. Trump’s focus on securing these resources is, in fact, part of a larger effort to reduce US dependency on Chinese exports, and in this way, to catch up with China’s dominance. This predates Trump’s concerns with Ukraine’s rare earths, as the Biden administration had already redeveloped a strategy towards displacing China.

What is significant is the shift in the tone and style through which US diplomacy is pursuing challenges China’s rare earth dominance. Under the Trump 2.0 administration, we are seeing the culmination of economic statecraft, which has increasingly intensified over the last decade. The use of trade and the control of global value chains as a statecraft tool has become very prominent over the last decade. By controlling technological components, resources, or other highly important sectors/industries, countries are strengthening the geopolitical position in the world order.

President Trump hosts President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy – February 28, 2025 by The White House is United States government work

Safeguarding critical rare earths

While investment in critical minerals has been a priority for the US for a long time, the second Trump administration has marked an important shift characterized by a more coercive negotiation strategy, coupled with a diminished regard for allies. China’s implementation of export restrictions on rare earth materials is a practice that began in the 2000s. The restrictions on these materials for which China is a globally dominant supplier raised prices sharply in other markets. In December 2023, China announced further bans on rare earths, which had significant implications for US national, economic, and rare earth security.

Besides so-called ‘Rare Earths’, Ukraine is also rich in other critical raw materials which, according to Kiev estimates, consist of five percent of the world’s ‘critical raw minerals’. These minerals include the crucial ones, like graphite, lithium, titanium, beryllium, uranium, etc, some of which are under Russian control at the time of writing this article. While the global share of the rare earths in Ukraine is very small according to available data, the value of its natural resources is thought in general terms to be worth around $14-25 trillion.

Critical minerals mean continuing influence and sovereignty

The agreement between the US and Ukraine over the minerals remains unsigned as for now, and ongoing discussions are addressing the details of the deal, which now seem to include nuclear power plants as well. While previous US administrations focused on the critical mineral sourcing, Trump has made the issue a key priority , invoking wartime powers to sign an executive order to increase of critical minerals production in the US.

Securing control over critical resources is a key driver behind the shift from a rules-based world order towards a more transactional approach. In this rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape, possessing critical natural resources determines strategic leverage, strengthening power-dynamics where resource rich nations are better positioned for survival or domination. On the other side, those without such leverage face increasing challenges to maintain their sovereignty and influence.

• Subscribe to LSE USAPP’s email newsletter to receive a weekly article roundup.
• Please read our comments policy before commenting. 
• Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of USAPP – American Politics and Policy, nor the London School of Economics.