and the it's been 3 years since russian forces launched in all out invasion of ukraine and the art of war has turned into the course of the deal. even washington or negotiating over minerals, american support hangs in the balance. but how realistic or donald trump's demands and what options does volume years? and let's see, have this is inside store the

welcome to the program. i'm several then. yay. ukrainian soil contains around 5 percent of the world's rear earth mineral deposits. now to us president donald trump, that looks like a cash payment in return for the 1000000000, the washington has sent to ukraine to support this war against russia. trump is demanding that keeps sign over the rights to about $500000000000.00 worth of that mineral wealth. presidents of lensky has rejected the 1st draft of that deal saying he can't quote, sell the state. but at what point, the selling the state start to look like saving the state, will get more without a panel in a moment. first though, this report from dmitri medical and the price of war is always high for ukraine. its tens of thousands of lives, 3 years of fighting as an economy in taxes for its allies. europe is given $100000000000.00. the united states has given

$350000000000.00, but here's worse. europe gave it in the form of a loan. they get their money back. we gave it in the form of nothing. so i want them to give us something for all of the money that we put up to a peas trumps transactional approach to foreign policy ukraine's presidency. lensky proposed a deal offer access to the countries wrap ups and other resources in roadside and for continued support from washington to meet some. what on the new might, these deposits are priceless, they with huge amounts of money, huge. that is why we need to protect it. so if we're talking about the deal, that's what the americans wants, then let's do a deal. we are only for it. ukraine has launch deposits of titanium, graphite and other minerals, but half of its read us deposit. so under russian control, moscow occupies nearly 20 percent of ukrainian territory after 3 years or 4. and

those are not, unfortunately, on the territories that are temporarily occupied, there are critical mineral resources worth $350000000000.00. we understand these resources are currently owned by the aggressor, to sort of the landscape appeals to us interest in re taking russian control territories. and as far as getting for security guarantees in return for its resources. mandel, you could, my logic was if you believe that the economic deal is positive, as a curacy guarantees the white copy of the boots on the ground where you have your business interest. donald trump aust for $500000000000.00 in mineral wealth, which key of rejected as much more than what the u. s. has supplied. so still the deal seems to be alive. i think we're pretty close to a deal and we'd better be close to a deal. ukraine didn't get a seat at the table last week when washington and moscow held talks on ending the

war. now with this potential minerals deal key, if may be trying to turn the diplomatic tide in its favor to meet them if it didn't go out to 0 for inside story. so let's bring in our guess in keith peters on my us executive director of the razor democracy initiative in washington dc. and it's all leaving the director of the razor program at the quincy institute for responsible state craft. and in milan, theresa fallon, director of the center for russia, europe, and asia studies, and a senior fellow at the chicago council in global affairs. a warm welcome to each and every one of you. peter, i have to start with you. you're in ukraine. how do ukrainians feel about all of this? well, this was obviously a shot, a shot, the feeling of a step in the back. oh 1st let's start with the figures. i mean,

the 1st you heard in the previous segment, $350000000000.00 cited by the american president. and it's an outright fabrication, exceeding the real figure by almost 3, the real figure being out on a 20 and europeans having captivated more as a matter of fact that get it bumped up to some news to go on a little bit ago. 500, and the question is why, what, what is why, why, why, why is it 500 to control 100 percent of the united states? then should ukraine, during the work of this, find the civilization fonts for ukraine, which you were asked, would probably, you know, administer and then use the funds as it sees it, whether it sees it. and then uh, if you great, it wants to continue buying weapons from the united states. it was by solid proceeds in the i know with paid $2.00 for each american dollar. i have these that

is just such extortionate extortion conditions that it almost seems like the ukraine was being forced to be restorations as if the rest of the state on the one hand, on the other hand being forced to compete you a tory agreement with the real aggressive by cd and signing off on the loss of 20 percent of territory. i mean you can not blame you agree is feeling a little bit excuse of frantic loss, confused in the same time i could not have helped you. people can help getting through this situation without a sort of a comic leaving. so some various meanings of pro rated people trying to make sense of the new reality that we're living in. but just to cut the, to the chase here. so no one really knows the amount of these, the rare earth and minerals and how long i mean, usually we will take to finally prospect and develop them. so all of this just

seems like a very easily put together document. it seems clear that no problem needed it to show it to flaunted to it, so electoral computer, hold on for a 2nd. if you don't mind, we'll, we'll get to all of that. we'll get to the deal, how we could work, what kind of security guarantees could be provided by the us if any, will get to all of that. but i, i 1st wanna make sure i engage all of you with this very simple question. and i recognize that it's a little bit night may be, but of is this. ok and theresa, i'll throw this one to you. and i recognize this, i'm moralizing. and this question, is it ok for the us president to say, hey, ukraine. i protected, you know, pay me of course, donald trump that appears to have broken all norms in international policy by doing this and he's losing a lot of us off power by, by being so transactional. it's okay to be transactional. but as the previous speaker pointed out, this is just extort extortion. i mean the mafia would be looking at this thinking,

hey, that's got a nice country there. be too bad as something happened to it in that's the type of language he's been using. and i think that's what this might wake up. you're up to actually help more uh with some sort of proper settlement on ukraine. but it's, it's very odd settlement because, or it's suggestion. we've seen it attempts to refine it because at the meaning security conference it was being leaked. everyone was looking at it. various newspaper journalist wrote about this ridiculous a scene approach. and then we saw yesterday in the financial times of the secretary, the ascent published an op ed trying to refine it to try to tony don't make it seem a little more reasonable. and then today on the 3rd anniversary, received a lensky completely saying, no, i cannot sign this document. and i will not condemn future generations of ukraine to pay off this ridiculous debt. so and the other thing is,

we really don't know what's there, what they're working off of our old soviets. maps, records aren't so rare. they're everywhere in the world. it's just the process of refining them. that's highly polluting. so i guess they want to do that, and ukraine after the country is destroyed to try to secure records there because china pretty much has the world's monopoly on that. so it seems it has a really has a very negative impact in europe. people are deeply concerned by excuse me, donald trump's approach and he doesn't seem to be watching you back. he seems to be threatening even more. so i think sometimes or you need to negotiate and maybe they can come up with a better idea. and one thing we should keep in mind in order to get buy in from the, from the donald trump, back in september, president zalinski had this idea to kind of, he understood a trump position and he was saying, well listen, we've got these lithium uh,

various minerals that are very valuable, so maybe we can come up with an agreement. okay. and then some in you create have criticized. so let's keep for doing this because they didn't ring fence it. so trump, hey, maybe that's a good idea. and he put it on steroids. and so it's kind of much bigger than anyone anticipated. and trump, you know, it's, excuse me and he worked through that to write it in the more realistic it could have possibly worked. anatole, is it predatory? is it fair or is it a waste of time to even ask this question? because it's just the world we live in extremely pressure trends. it's not fat or tools as it stands. of course, trump has not protected you frame, and these are not the terms on which of american a to crime would do it. and so this is a, this is a betrayal. and as peter said, it's also very nearly 3 times most america has actually given no,

i mean level and it's almost for a 2nd on the number. i think it's interesting to give a sense of perspective in this, this goes to your point. um, donald trump says he spent 3, the us spent $350000000000.00 on ukraine, but the us congress actually appropriated a $170.00 for a 100 of which went directly to aiding the ukrainian government. so a 174, i think is the, is the number we actually know from the us administration. it has spent on uh, countering russia in the war. and ukraine by no means orders. this has, has actually reached ukraine yet. um, as, as, as i understand a 120 is what has actually come to ukraine. so far, in any case, i mean the point is but what trump is asking for is not to move in america days and you know, it was not a loan, and it was a, it was a against a which was seen to be a in america's own security in for us. so this, you know,

this approach is highly of addressing much. now that said, perhaps something can be negotiated, which is more reasonable. you know, trump has of rent, cool. and if you look, you know what you did to canada and mexico of making a rate just a moms and then scaling them back in return for much smaller concessions. so we'll have to see. but i mean is this? well, i mean the maximal ukrainian hopes that they wouldn't get to, in any case, you know, after the previous bite, the ministration set that would never be american boots on the ground in ukraine means a trumpet. ministration seems unanimous on that if they could guarantee a permanent supply of american weapons to defend ukraine. well, yes, that would be something, but whether it wouldn't be worse, this price, we just didn't know. and then as teresa said, you know,

we're not to to sure what is actually the most, it would cost to get 2 times. you know, one must remember this one stage, those tremendously overblown reports of as kind of stones mineral and oil wells are meant to live close. that was a different situation and kind of gotten one. but still they to suggestions where that there is far less of this. and finally, as we heard when it comes to the river, us, which are what america is really interested in. a very large proportion of them are under russian control. and therefore, practically speaking will not be covered by any deal. peter, what choice does the crating presidents volunteer? zalinski have because he's negotiating under duress. right. this is not a negotiation amongst equals the mirror. zalinski is trying to save his country. his army is on the back foot, and i think there's no consensus that the ukraine and military on its own cannot

own. not only can it not when this war it in not read, it cannot recover the land of russia as conquered. but if the western aides of military a disappears, it probably loses more ground. hey, indeed, that's been a dollar. so it's just the other day, once again, the via the president that it will not win the world without the americans though involvement in the repeal by the only knowledge of it are not going to be able to feel that whole created by the absence of american age at any time soon it would take quite a long time. and that's an understatement. to do that, don't, we probably might not be catastrophic. i mean, at least there's some going to be some, a window of opportunity for us to try to catch up with. that's another topic. uh yes. so that's the, has acknowledging these press conferences recently that is being negotiated under duress essentially. and do basically acknowledge that you created what have

to sign it one way or another, hopefully not under such extraordinary conditions. and just a day there was information with the ukrainian deputy prime minister has said that the 2 parties are close to actually signing the deal. and i haven't seen the. ready that the terms being asked out right now, but i think the, the great component, the important component for us is the security component. it just makes no sense for americans to say, well, you know, the, just the american companies doing business there would secure the science and protect ukraine of just this year, present as well. obviously as a license the because remember, 2014 premier east, east ukraine, the started, the russian will do a lots of western companies working in both areas. well the, you know, see how that works out. right. and so it's not clear why trump would be resistant to the idea of uh, you know, a bull street, uh, american, uh,

presidents like that with the military. uh, so for right, uh, at the same time you have to consider why the question of $300000000000.00 a frozen russian assets is not being a, you know, mentioned by the american side. and then this would be a winning issue, and he refused to have to step up and start offering their own versions on of a dream and that it would be helpful to you pray. why are we not talking about the $300000000000.00 the russian frozen dollars rather than you pray in mind? once again with the victim, be in no scope for, for the rest of to take 20 percent of its territory hit to do it. take 20 percent and use some money. i know to the other side, you see. so yeah, both sides are stored in ukraine. the green is getting nothing great is getting poor when russia is getting away with what was that also asked the 300000000000 frozen us, the dollars that i mean this is, it is so many uh,

questions haney or disagreement. so, and i'm really hoping that to, by the time it comes out, it won't be like a democracy is sort, hey, what was the lensky? because anything showed up a dignified and workable document will be a very low create a very dangerous situation. politically, inside the country you printer, so i'm not happy about this deal overall. several of you have mentioned, we don't actually know how much potential mineral welfare is in ukraine. now. i've seen several estimates that in the trillions responsible state craft and adult on. and until that is, uh, your think pack has in at least one piece estimated it could be 11 trillion. now if you were to take that number, okay, hypothetical if you were to take that number as it say, maybe there's 11 trillion dollars worth of potential wealth there. and the us is starting at its highest bargaining position at half a trillion may be, you know,

given the realities on the ground and given that ukraine needs is military support . maybe that price is actually something ukraine needs to accept. perhaps that's how the us is thinking about this and it will not, i'm sure that these have us to think a bunch of bunch of 11 trillion is an estimate and you have to get the stuff and you have to look at how much of is the unit is actually on the russian not to train in control and it would almost have to remain so. but i think what is also illustrates is the unity unilateralism, the gross big nature of the trunk, presume? and also a degree of what based on, you know, i'm bringing this to, to, to negotiate with allies, but also a degree of chaos and incompetence. because of course, one thing which will be absolutely critical to the future of ukraine is reconstruction and also to ukraine's hopes of joining the european union. now,

what needs to be done is to cross a package of investment in ukraine by the european union by the united states. we is a, a large part of these 300000000000 of c's russian assets. but this needs to be a collective project on what truck the trump administration is, is basically doing is saying, you know, give it, give it to all to us. no, that will be, i mean, the car won't be any absolutely. guarantees of future ukrainian security. no such thing exists in international relations who in the history last a long time. but i mean, what is true is that if you could have a much more prosperous ukraine with heavy western investment, that would certainly strength and ukraine as

a country and springs and its position to defend itself. but that isn't exactly by any means what this proposed the looks like. theresa, what could us security guarantees look like under this potential deal to both ukraine in the us say could be signed imminently as well. that's the sticking points because we've seen the previous agreements when you couldn't give up their nuclear weapons. everyone promised to protect them. that didn't happen in 2014. we saw the annexation of crimea. and then we also saw the european negotiate without that you estimates one admins to which did not work either. so zalinski will only, you know, settle for guaranteed security meeting, getting into nato. and that doesn't look like it might happen. so we're really difficult negotiating position, and europeans don't even want to call themselves these keepers. they, you know,

they want to be kind of be off of the line of contact. and then of course, put in has not agreed to that. so this is the main sticking point, and no one seems to want to step up to the plate on that. now, a charitable view of this agreement may be that if you look at the fine print that's been published, i think the telegraph had some language published from the agreement was that it was to guarantee that no other countries that did not have to help support you print during the war would be involved in reconstruction. so they didn't say the word, but i might take was that it was trying to, they want to keep china out of there. and we saw with china's political settlement because they didn't call it a piece proposal. the 10 point was that they wanted to actually help rebuild to print. so i don't think anyone is developed by that idea the us, nor europe to see a big chinese presence in ukraine. the premiums won't take help from wherever they can get it, because their country has been destroyed. keeping china out of rebuilding ukraine

is one thing, but what ukraine needs in the near and median term, what you create needs right now is protection from russia. and so the question was, how it, how does the us guarantee protection from russia bearing in mind that ukraine has already lost almost 20 percent of its territory going back to 2014 and crime in that's the, as i said, the 2nd put, and there doesn't seem to be any guarantees in disagreement. so zalinski has stated, unless there isn't a guaranteed uh for security he, he would be happy to resign his position. and as long as you probably will join nato, so can we get everyone to agree to get that? have you credit join nato, that is the only way to have security get. well, i believe us, the construction has ruled that out. yes. but although people takes up, had to walk back his for knows about no ukraine, no boots on the ground. and as everyone has been describing it as north korean diplomacy, i really like only the big leader, donald trump,

can decide. so everything is allegedly on the table. peter in ukraine. what is the feeling about the 20 percent of the land of ukrainian land, the country? no longer controls, do people feel that's last forever or do ukrainian still hold hope that they can re gain some of that or i would say something normally would probably cling to that hope and officially that's official position of the president the, you know, on obviously there's going to be no official recognition, rush has ownership of the land, but i think there's that very much, not stinking, but only some realization that it may never be gotten back. sure. uh, situation where i put in times a lot of a sudden there's some kind of an over throw and the russian falls apart. i mean, this is some kind of a rose color. you know, our dreams ukrainians have been living, especially we're living especially for us that you and

a half of the war when it felt like rush or my just crumble into its constituent box. well is that doesn't seem to be a realistic scenario for the near future. i mean, for me, it's a very personal question as well, much personal hurt go on the name of the dentist, and i have uh, you know, properties there, etc. you know, even that may have been lost. you retrieve it really to me. we just get, i mean this is just part of the lives we'd have to probably know of knowledge then what is done is done. but once again, that's not the official position of the ukrainian government. and that's actually just as you know that. busy is huge dilemma for well security, just the fact of that sort of recognition of depend doors box and will open as far as presidents for other potential conflicts elsewhere, you know, venezuela versus deanna, china, taiwan, etc, etc. the numbers discounts that they looked at is a very interesting observation. we have

a couple of minutes left on the show. and in fact, i wanted to go in that direction of what precedent this sets because the rest of the world is looking at how donald trump is treating this. he has promised to end the war and this is how he is attempting to do it. there are so many other countries that depend on us financial aid or us military 8. i mean it's in them, at least it's in asia, south korea, japan and egypt, jordan, israel, of course, the largest cumulative recipient over time of us military a. there's so many countries that depend on us dollars to a large extent for their military survival. what are they? what kind of question are they asking yourselves right now? and it's all. and i think it's caused deep anxiety in a great many countries. i mean, the new child sort of the drum and the fridge. magnets as told, but the need for the gentleman independence from america, because america can no longer be relied on. so yes, i mean, this is sending a, a very alarming signal to us out of those. that said, i mean, countries you know,

make up their minds to do things for their own reasons. and on the basis of calculations, you know, of a, by their own interest in their own situation. the traditional completion of northern cyprus, 50 years ago, did not set off a way for the next ations and invasions. so i didn't, we need to be apocalyptic about this. but certainly, i mean, it is a, a transformative moment for international relations. theresa, do you see? ripple effects to this, i guess, to paraphrase lena, and he said, there are some months where if they feel like nothing happened and some months i feel like the whole geo political played. so they are a tough move we've seen with the election yesterday of the german, the new german chancellor, mertz. she views that the transatlantic relationship is broken. allies in asia are watching this very closely with the trump administration, a big change from biden. and if i was taiwan or japan, australia, south korea,

they're all watching this very closely. so it looks like an odd transaction. no of us policy us is considered the guarantor of their security in that region. and so i think it sense, very dangerous messages and who's the biggest winner out of all of this? i would say russia and china because we see all the things that they want a weakening of transatlantic relations of donald trump appears almost like an autopay kind of saying you have to sign this deal no matter what. not that long ago, people were choosing china with their belt and road program of debt track diplomacy . well, what donald trump is proposing for ukraine really looks a lot like that trapped diplomacy in my view. all right, that's the time we have it today. thank you. so much to all our guests peters on my us and it's all leaving and theresa fallon and thank you to for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting the inside story page on our website. that sounds with your dot com. we're also on facebook, if you'd like to post or comments. that's facebook dot com forward slash ha inside

story. and you can join the conversation on x r handle there at the james side store for me. so then you're in the entire team here in zillow homes. by examining the headlines, do you think the ceasefire were home? we have to make it worth checking. the discussion. obviously you cannot last deportations of millions of people on day one, exploring abundance of wealth cloth programming. if you on some image of the comes from using a tradition, then here it is designed to inform, motivates and into fine. we are the ones that are actually shaping the future that we want to live in on algae 0. china is experiencing a youth unemployment crisis. millions of university graduates are unable to find jobs or meet the families expectations. 101 east for those young jobs seeking. they

navigate. china is challenging. labor market. china is unemployed. on out to 0 for rise to use human appeal has been making the most of your mfc. our team successfully deliver your charity to those who need it most across the mostly mild . we are feeding, building, caring, tooling, planting, fuel refined, teaching and helping transform lives. this is messy in action. this is human appeal the the

. ringback the, [000:00:00;00] the color on the pocket, this is the news our life. and so coming up in the next 60 minutes, the french president arrives at the white house, is your looks for a place at the table to negotiate an end to the ukraine war. the european leaders without the us mentioned key pledging billions and aid on the 1st anniversary of russia's invasion. also, a head is around intensifies its assault on the occupied westbank waiting homes and