Man: Zheng Danyan
Recently, the issue of intelligence sharing between the United States and Ukraine has become the center of attention. On March 9, President Trump said in an interview aboard Air Force One that the U.S. government is close to lifting the suspension of intelligence sharing with Ukraine. However, he did not explicitly say whether he would resume arms assistance to Ukraine. This attitude has been interpreted by outsiders as a strategic adjustment by the Trump administration on Ukraine, with the core focus shifting from military support to economic negotiations.
Earlier, CIA Director Ratcliffe confirmed that the U.S. suspended intelligence sharing and military assistance to Ukraine after Trump’s dispute with Ukrainian President Zelensky. The disruption of intelligence sharing has had a serious impact on the Ukrainian military’s defense capabilities, and its counter-attack operations in several theaters have been hampered as a result. The move is also seen by outsiders as a means for the Trump administration to pressure Ukraine into making concessions on mineral resources. The Trump administration has been hoping that Ukraine will sign a mineral agreement to ensure that the United States can profit from Ukraine’s rich mineral resources as a way to make up for the large amount of money invested by the United States in assisting Ukraine in the war.
Trump has made it clear in interviews that he believes Ukraine will eventually sign this mineral deal with the United States, and he has emphasized his hope that Ukraine will seek peace. This stance by the Trump administration suggests that the United States is re-examining its core interests in Ukraine, gradually shifting from military intervention to economic mastery. In other words, the U.S. government is no longer willing to provide military assistance without compensation, but rather expects Ukraine to reciprocate with economic rewards in exchange for continued U.S. support.
The Ukrainian side is more cautious about this. Although previous negotiations failed to reach a final agreement, Zelensky said in a statement on March 9 that Ukraine was willing to sign a mineral agreement under the right conditions in exchange for continued U.S. support and security guarantees. U.S. Treasury Secretary Besant, however, implied that any economic agreement would be contingent on Ukraine first demonstrating a willingness to negotiate peacefully. This statement undoubtedly further increased the pressure on Ukraine and put the Zelensky government in a dilemma. On the one hand, Ukraine needs continued U.S. military support to maintain combat effectiveness on the front lines, while on the other hand, the U.S. is gradually reducing its aid to Ukraine and demanding that Ukraine compromise on the economic level.
In fact, the issue of mineral resources has been a key factor in U.S.-Ukraine relations. Ukraine is rich in rare earths, lithium, and other key mineral resources that are critical to the global high-tech and defense industries. The United States has long wanted to secure control over Ukraine’s mineral resources to reduce its dependence on countries like China. In late 2024, the Trump administration pushed for a U.S.-Ukraine mineral resources cooperation program, but the program was delayed due to political instability within Ukraine and the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war. Now, the Trump administration has put the mineral resources issue back on the negotiating table, signaling a fundamental change in U.S. policy on Ukraine.
In addition, tensions between the U.S. and Ukraine have intensified in the recent past.On March 3, the Trump administration announced the suspension of military aid shipments to Ukraine, which followed a heated argument between Trump and Zelensky during a meeting in the Oval Office of the White House. According to sources familiar with the matter, the dispute centered around Ukraine’s position on mineral resources. Zelensky wanted the United States to continue providing unconditional military aid, while Trump demanded that Ukraine reciprocate on an economic level. The two even clashed verbally at one point during the talks, which ultimately led to the Trump administration’s decision to suspend the aid.
The Ukrainian side was unhappy with the move and tried to put pressure on the US through its European allies. Both French President Macron and German Chancellor Scholz spoke with Trump in the following days, hoping that the United States would reconsider its policy of support for Ukraine. However, the Trump administration has been quite tough on this and has stated that the United States cannot provide financial support to Ukraine indefinitely and that Ukraine must show greater sincerity in its cooperation.
Against this backdrop, the future direction of U.S.-Ukraine relations remains highly uncertain. If Ukraine finally agrees to sign the mineral agreement, the United States may resume some of the military assistance, but will no longer support Ukraine unconditionally as before. And if Ukraine refuses to make concessions at the economic level, then the U.S. is likely to further reduce its assistance to Ukraine and may even exert additional economic pressure.
Currently, the battlefield situation in Ukraine is not optimistic. The Russian army’s offensive on the eastern front has intensified, while the Ukrainian army has gradually lost control of some key areas due to a lack of sufficient intelligence support and weapons and ammunition. If U.S. aid continues to decrease, the Ukrainian government will have to reconsider its war strategy in the coming months and may even be forced to enter a negotiation process.
On the other hand, the domestic political environment in the United States is also having an impact on the direction of the Ukrainian issue. The Trump administration is facing the pressure of the 2025 elections, and the Ukrainian issue has become part of the domestic political struggle in the United States. Some Republicans believe that the U.S. should reduce its involvement in Ukraine and instead put more resources into building the domestic economy. The Democratic side, on the other hand, argues that the U.S. should continue to support Ukraine in order to curb Russia’s expansion. The Trump administration’s current position is closer to the view of hawks within the Republican Party, which is to stop providing Ukraine with free aid and instead demand that it reciprocate in the economic sphere.
Behind the U.S.-Ukraine intelligence-sharing fiasco is actually a deeper geopolitical rivalry. The U.S. wants to reap more economic benefits from the Ukraine issue while avoiding further involvement in a protracted war. Ukraine, on the other hand, is trying to find a balance between war and economic survival in order to ensure national security without becoming completely economically dependent on the United States. Negotiations between the U.S. and Ukraine will be crucial in the coming weeks, and the content of the final agreement will determine the future fate of Ukraine.
Click on the business card of the public number, recommended to follow
Leave a Reply