Ukraine rebuffs U.S. $500B fund demand, seeks smaller pact

In Kyiv, it is emphasized that the actual value of the support received is about $90 billion, almost five times less than the amount reported by Washington, according to a Ukrainian official familiar with the negotiations.

Another agency source noted that negotiators will need more time to reach an agreement, as the current draft proposed by the U.S. contains "questionable elements," and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is not ready to approve it.

According to the official, the main obstacle is the lack of guarantees for future military and financial aid. He also added that Zelensky would like to sign the agreement on resources with Donald Trump personally, and for this to happen before a meeting between the American leader and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Sources from the NV portal confirmed that Ukraine proposed reducing the fund size to $100 billion and conveyed its version of the agreement through U.S. special envoy Keith Kellogg.

Kyiv also expressed a desire for a meeting of the presidents in Washington next week to discuss details. According to a newspaper source, a few days ago, Zelensky held a meeting with the heads of various departments and is currently leaning towards the idea that "an agreement in some improved form will have to be signed."

On Saturday at the CPAC conference, Donald Trump stated that the United States spent about $350 billion on aid to Ukraine.

On the same day, the Pentagon reported a different amount—$183 billion, of which, according to its data, about $58 billion was spent within the U.S.

Zelensky, meanwhile, stated that Americans provided Ukraine with $67 billion in weapons and $31.5 billion in direct financial aid.

On February 21, Kyiv received an updated version of the resource agreement from Washington—more stringent than the original draft that Zelensky rejected.

The new document includes not only the extraction of rare earth metals but also gas and oil. The updated version also proposes the creation of a special fund to manage Ukrainian resources, over which the U.S. would have full control.

Washington also demands that the parties' contributions be set at a two-to-one ratio—Ukraine would transfer two-thirds of the extraction revenues to the fund, and the U.S. one-third. In reality, Americans would not have to deposit any funds, and their contribution would be credited against the arms already provided to Ukraine.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wrote on Saturday in the "Financial Times" that under the agreement, the fund will focus on the long-term reconstruction and development of Ukraine, and Washington will gain economic and managerial rights in it.

He is convinced that this approach will build the transparency, accountability, and corporate governance measures needed to secure private investment. Meanwhile, Bessent clarified that the U.S. does not intend to acquire Ukraine’s physical assets or add extra debt to the country.

The original proposal from Washington envisaged transferring 50% of the proceeds from resource extraction to Americans and 50% of the value of "all new licenses granted to third parties" for their exploitation.

It was also noted in the agreement that it would take precedence over any other trade agreements concluded by Kyiv. Zelensky twice refused to sign the document, stating that it requires refinement, especially concerning clear security guarantees for Ukraine.

As a result, following the Munich Security Conference, the U.S. president's advisor Michael Waltz expressed "great disappointment" over the failure of the agreement. Trump himself called Zelensky a "dictator" without elections, who chose war, to which the Ukrainian president responded by saying that the American leader fell victim to "Russian disinformation."

Source: Bloomberg / The Moscow Times / PAP