“Absolutely wrong.” Trump demands from Ukraine’s war too big – editorial article New York Post

“The proposed treaty, which is reported, got to the President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky’s table last week, requires half of the country’s income from natural resources, ports and infrastructure indefinitely as a reckoning for US military assistance since the beginning of the war», – the newspaper writes.

As noted in Nyp, In terms of GDP share This one The requirement looks lot harsher than the one that allies-winners On the Entente They nominated Germany after the Versailles peace after the First World War.

More than in the publication stated that Presidential statement Trump to the address President Zelensky (allegedly “in Ukraine was three years to negotiate ”with the Russian Federation)made It is February 18were completely unjustified.

Source in Trump Administration reported in a comment Nypthat the agreement proposed by Ukraine is “the return of hundreds of billion dollars of money from US taxpayers.”

“As if a bunch of” Kiev fraudsters “cleared the pockets of the Yankees,” the words of the source in the publication were interpreted.

However, in Nyp Note that the departure of Kiev weapons and other military assistance was “A fantastic deal for Uncle Sam (The slang name of the US authorities – ed.), Not a check without a signature that was spent by a besieged nation. “

As the publication writes, with about $ 175 billion spent by Washington on Assistance to Ukraine in war against the Russian Federationabout $ 70 billion was returned to the US economy – to create new weapons instead of outdated models that were sent to Kiev. And this, in turn, became a good for the American military-industrial complex and workers in the United States.

IN Nyp It is noted that the event has received great benefit in other respects from assistance to Ukraine.

“The efforts of Kiev weakened the military potential of Moscow, and the war has damaged the Russian economy. Ukraine paid blood – it estimates that 46,000 of its soldiers were killed, another 390,000 were injured. Not to mention tens of thousands of dead civilians and more than 6 million refugees. The most important thing is that Ukraine’s assistance in protecting against the illegal, barbaric invasion of Vladimir Putin was the right act, ”the newspaper writes.

IN Nyp It was directly stated that “squeeze the weakened country of all that is possible – simply because it would be possible.”

“There is an opportunity to conclude an agreement that will leave Ukraine’s dignity inviolable and benefit both parties – perhaps something like a $ 500 billion agreement on the rare earth minerals, which they talked about last week, is not that. In this case, Trump asks too much, ”he summed up in the publication.

Zelensky’s refusal to sign an agreement with the US on rare earth metals – what is known

On February 12, 2025, President Zelensky, as a result of a meeting with the US Finance Minister Scott Bessent, stated that the United States had handed over to Ukraine a preliminary document of an agreement on partnership in mineral mining.

However, on the same day, CNN reported that the head of the Ukrainian state refused to sign the document.

Reuters also reported two Ukrainian sources that Ukraine has submitted its proposals for a bilateral agreement on February 14.

On February 15, President Zelensky said at the Munich Security Conference that he did not allow Ukrainian ministers to sign a mineral agreement with the United States because it is not ready and does not protect Ukraine’s interests.

On the same day, Financial Times, citing its sources, said that President Zelensky refused to transfer about 50% of the rights to Ukrainian Rare Earth minerals due to the lack of specific security guarantees by Washington.

On the same day, Financial Times, citing its sources, said that President Zelensky refused to transfer about 50% of the rights to Ukrainian Rare Earth minerals due to the lack of specific security guarantees by Washington.

On February 18, The Telegraph reported that the Trump administration offered Ukraine an agreement, the terms of which can be compared to those that are usually imposed on aggressor countries that were defeated in the war.

In particular, the White House was required to transfer 50% of mineral revenues in Ukraine in the future, as well as 50% of the cost of all new licenses issued to third parties.

According to the publication, these conditions are much tougher than those imposed on Germany and Japan after the Second World War.