friends are being killed in this country. we're blessed. we live in harmony with all different regions. i'll just leave a wealth, travels to south america for a guy, and he's remington, as long as the lake and they enjoy doing it. we have a rich country in terms of diversity, and that is something that we can celebrate around the time. in diana, on alex's era, it's been 3 years since russian forces launched in all out invasion of ukraine and the art of war. this turned into the force of the deal. even washington or negotiating over minerals, americans support hangs in the balance. but how realistic or donald trump's demands? and what options does volume your zaleski have? this is inside story, the

welcome to the program. i'm sort of any a 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 billions that washington has sent to ukraine to support this war against russia. trump is demanding the team's sign over the rights to about $500000000000.00 worth of that mineral wealth. president zalinski has rejected the 1st draft of that deal saying he can't quote, sell the state. but at what point the selling the states start to look like saving the state will get more without panel in a moment. first though, this report from dimitry 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 not say you. 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 red ups and other resources in return 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 and re taking russian control territories and is on screen for security guarantees in return for its resources and the low you could, my logic was if you believe that the economic deal is positive and security guarantees, then why comp, 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 to read the real figure being a $120.00 and europeans have activated more as a matter of fact that get it bumped up to some news to go on and make it go 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 funk 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 create wants to continue buying weapons from the united states, it would buy solid proceeds and you know, would pay $2.00 for each american dollar here. these are just such extortionate

extortion conditions that it almost seems like the ukraine was being forced to be reparations, as if the rest of the state on the one hand, on the other hand being forced to capitulate to re agreement with the real aggressive by cd and signing off on the loss of 20 percent of territory. i mean you cannot blame you. free is feeling a little bit excuse of frantic loss, confused in the same time a could not have helped you. people can help getting through this situation without a sort of a conflict with leaving so, so various meetings 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 use it 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 electric and peter, 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 to resale, throw this one to you and i recognize this some 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 it. 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 present, published an office, 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 are 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 if 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 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, 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 he 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, excuse me. and he worked through that to make it 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 trimmed, it's not fat or tools as it stands. of course, trump has not protected you frame. and these were 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 more. some area code has actually given. no,

i mean that level and it's almost for a 2nd on the number. i think it's interesting to give a sense of perspective and 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 ukranian 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 false. 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 so low 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 it just so much. now that said, perhaps something can be negotiated, which is more reasonable. you know, trump has a rank code. 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 the tool. sure,

what is actually the most it would cost to get $2.00 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 in kind of on one, but still they to suggestions whether 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 volunteers have lensky 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 is no consensus that you create in 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 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 repeals by their own acknowledgement, are not going to be able to fill that whole created by the absence of american age . at any time soon it would take quite a long time investment under statements. 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, do you guys acknowledging these press conferences recently that it's being uh, 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 of coast actually signing the deal. and i haven't seen 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. ready americans to say, well, you know, the just the american company is doing business there would secure the sites and protect ukraine. so just issue a present as well. obviously as a license because remember, 2014 premier east east ukraine. the start of the russian will do a lots of western companies working in both areas while they, you know, see how that works out. right. and so it's not clear why drunk would be resistant to the idea of uh, you know, bolstering american uh,

presidents like that with the military. uh, so for right, uh, at the same time, or you have to consider why the question of $300000000000.00 a frozen russian assets is not being a, as 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 of, of agreement. that would be helpful to you pray. why are we not talking about this $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 take 20 percent and use some money. i know to the other side, you see so yeah, both sides are exporting ukraine. the green is getting nothing green 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 i showed up a dignified unworkable document will be a very low create a very dangerous situation politically inside the country you printing, 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 your thing 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 or you'd say maybe there's 11 trillion dollars worth of potential wealth there. and the us 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 this military support, maybe that price is actually something ukraine needs to accept. perhaps that's how the us is thinking about this and it'll i'm sure that these have us just thinking about just bunch 11 trillion is an estimate and you have to get the stuff adams. and you have to look at how much of this 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 to 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, with a, a large part of these 300000000000 of seas 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 him twice. now that will be, i mean, the car won't be any absolutely. guarantees of future ukrainian security. no such thing exists in international relations. you know, history last a long time. but i mean, what is true is that if you could have a much more prosperous, you frame 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. uh when you print gave 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 will 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 in crimea? 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 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 in construction has ruled that out. yes. but although people takes, i've had to walk batches 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 liter 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 that the country no longer controls? do people feel that's lost forever or do ukrainian still hold hope that they can re gain some of that? so 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. a rush has ownership of the land, but i think there's it 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 medium of the desk, and the handle, 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 i think it's caused deep anxiety in a great many countries. i mean, the new child sort of germany fridge, magnets has to, but it needs a 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 about their own interest and their own situation. the traditional completion of northern cyprus, 50 years ago, did not set off a way for the next station and invasions. so um, do we need to be apocalyptic about this? but certainly, i mean, it is a, a transformative moment for international relations. teresa, do you see ripple effects to this? a? yes, 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 murtz. he 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 u. s. policy us is considered the guarantor of their security in that region. and so i think it says 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. 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 your 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 the bottom of the sheer s came and strikes gunfire and enjoyed a dangerous journey from my home. for late in the dawn, now, disease is catching up with her mother is worried. the pain back home came and dropped. it killed my mabel with school, how children. i swore it. this is joe opened up with a town that many refugees are traveling through before the influx. there are about 7000 local residents. now we have more than $40000.00 displaced the solstice of declining. that is not what a degree menial worried about what will happen when the rainy season starts in may

for the inhabitants of indonesia is remote islands. health care is home delivered by so 1st nurses and for them to use as a veteran, those hands over the readings to adult or medical crisis images underlining the pivotal role of these dedicated cares in the now an island called a, with this documentary on a jersey and i'm told stories from asia and the pacific on notice here the,

there's no limit to how a dream continue to study in your own adventure now counter and the some single venue in doha, with your top stories on alpha 0, sorry, as president the middle sharah has opened a national conference in damascus and repeated his call for unity. the dialogue attempts to chart the path forward and laid the groundwork for a new constitution. it also aims to address economic, social, and political issues. and you government, which to power in december. as promised and inclusive transition in this conference was one of his pleasures. and then the, the, this is a period of rebuilding our country of decades of destruction of devastation. syria

is indivisible and that one might slice in our unity, syria is economy has been reeling on the systematic vandalism.