President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy are set to meet at the White House on Friday following heated exchanges over peace negotiations and an unexpected shift in U.S. policy toward Vladimir Putin and Russia.
As the conflict nears its third anniversary, Trump has referred to Zelenskyy as a “dictator without elections” and a “modestly successful comedian,” while adopting a more accommodating stance toward Putin. Trump suggested that the U.S. would negotiate the terms of a settlement with Russia.
Zelenskyy, in response, accused Trump of being trapped in a “web of disinformation,” particularly after preliminary discussions between U.S. and Kremlin officials in Saudi Arabia. Trump also falsely claimed that Ukraine initiated the war, disregarding the fact that Russia launched the invasion.
The key issue at stake, which could influence the course of peace talks, is an agreement granting the U.S. access to Ukraine’s mineral resources. Trump has framed this deal as a means to ensure that American taxpayers receive some form of reimbursement for the financial aid provided to Ukraine during its conflict with Russia.
“We’ll be digging. We’ll be dig, dig, digging. Dig, we must,” Trump stated on Thursday, emphasizing that the U.S. would be actively involved in extracting rare earth minerals in Ukraine. “It’ll be great for Ukraine. It’s like a huge economic development project. So, it’ll be good for both countries.”
Zelenskyy, however, has presented the deal differently, viewing it primarily as a strategy to maintain U.S. support.
Although the agreement does not offer the security guarantees Zelenskyy deems essential for a lasting peace settlement, Trump administration officials argue that significant U.S. investment in Ukraine’s economy could function as a deterrent against further Russian aggression.
“I will meet with President Trump,” Zelenskyy stated on Wednesday. “For me, and for all of us in the world, it is crucial that America’s assistance is not stopped. Strength is essential on the path to peace.”
Details of the Agreement
According to officials familiar with the discussions, the agreement involves U.S.-Ukraine collaboration in extracting valuable minerals and other natural resources from Ukrainian soil.
Unlike previous proposals, this version does not require Ukraine to allocate revenue from mineral sales to repay the U.S. $500 billion—an amount the Trump administration previously described as “payback” for the approximately $183 billion in aid provided to Ukraine, as reported by the U.S. special inspector general overseeing Ukrainian assistance.
Instead, the deal proposes the creation of a joint investment fund for Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction. The specifics regarding the management and operation of this fund will be determined through subsequent negotiations.
Much of the success of this initiative will depend on market forces.
“The profitability of the fund is entirely dependent on the success of new investments in Ukraine’s resources,” said Gracelin Baskaran, director of the Critical Minerals Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and Meredith Schwartz, a research associate at the same program.
“Therefore, the response of private industry is key to the success of the fund and will determine how much value the United States ultimately derives,” they explained.
However, Ukrainian officials made some concessions. Initially, Kyiv sought firm security guarantees within the agreement, but the finalized framework lacks these provisions.
“However, the idea is that with joint U.S.-Ukraine investment in the nation’s resources, the United States will continue to have a stake in Ukraine’s security, stability, and lasting peace and therefore be incentivized to uphold and defend Ukrainian security,” Baskaran and Schwartz stated.
Should the deal prove successful, they suggest that the U.S. may enhance its mineral security, but tangible benefits might not materialize for decades.
“Mining is a long-term effort—so the United States may not yield benefits for another 20 years,” they noted.
Trump himself acknowledged the uncertainty.
“You know, you dig and maybe things aren’t there like you think they’re there,” he remarked on Thursday.
A Shift in Trump’s Rhetoric
After days of harsh criticism directed at Zelenskyy, Trump moderated his stance on Thursday.
When asked whether he still considered Zelenskyy a dictator—an assertion he made just over a week ago—Trump replied, “Did I say that? I can’t believe I said that,” before quickly moving on.
Later in the day, Trump also commended Zelenskyy and Ukrainian forces for their resilience in combat.
“We’ve given him a lot of equipment and a lot of money, but they have fought very bravely. No matter how you figure it, they have really fought,” Trump acknowledged. “Somebody has to use that equipment. And they have been very brave in that sense.”
Ukrainian officials advocating for the mineral deal may view Trump’s softened rhetoric as validation of their argument—that signing the agreement could strengthen ties between Kyiv and the Trump administration, whereas delaying it might further strain Trump’s perception of Zelenskyy.
However, whether this positive shift in tone will endure remains uncertain.
“Critical mineral resource access is the latest arena for Trump to focus his transactional methods of diplomacy,” Baskaran and Schwartz stated. “But the viability of the deal remains to be seen as tensions continue to rise between the two world leaders.”
Given Trump’s well-known impatience, some U.S. officials anticipate that slow progress on the deal could lead to frustration.
Additionally, any discord during Friday’s White House meeting could quickly sour Trump’s attitude toward Zelenskyy once again. While Trump is expected to emphasize the economic benefits of the agreement for the U.S., Zelenskyy is likely to push for additional security assurances.
Nonetheless, Trump projected optimism ahead of the meeting.
“I think we’re going to have a very good meeting,” he said. “We’re going to get along really well. Okay. We have a lot of respect. I have a lot of respect for him.”
John E. Herbst, senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center and a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, believes that the very fact that the meeting is taking place is a positive development for Ukraine.
“Zelenskyy’s visit highlights how far he has come from two weeks back, when Trump spoke of seeing Putin as many as three times in the near future, or even last week, when senior Russian and U.S. officials were meeting in Riyadh,” Herbst said. “Yet now it is Zelenskyy, not Putin, in the Oval Office.”
Ongoing Peace Talks
While public attention has largely shifted to negotiations over the mineral deal, discussions aimed at ultimately resolving the war in Ukraine are continuing through separate diplomatic channels.
On Thursday, American and Russian officials convened in Istanbul for a six-hour meeting focused on expanding the staffing of their respective embassies in Moscow and Washington. Secretary of State Marco Rubio previously emphasized that such diplomatic expansion was necessary to facilitate cooperation, including efforts to end the war in Ukraine.
Officials from both sides described the meeting’s outcome as favorable, predicting that a stronger diplomatic presence could pave the way for broader peace negotiations and a potential summit between Trump and Putin.
As European leaders push for U.S. security guarantees to enforce a truce in Ukraine, Trump has repeatedly asserted his confidence in Putin’s commitment to honoring a peace agreement.
“I’ve known him for a long time now,” Trump said. “I don’t believe he’s going to violate his word. I don’t think he’ll be back. When we make a deal, I think the deal is going to hold.”
However, before meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Trump added an important qualifier.
“You know, look, it’s trust and verify, let’s call it that,” he remarked.
Clifford D. May, president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, stressed the importance of Trump maintaining a realistic perspective on Putin.
“As President Trump attempts to negotiate a halt to Russia’s war against Ukraine, it’s not unreasonable for him to show respect for Mr. Putin (as he has been) if he believes that will make Mr. Putin more likely to agree to concessions,” May said.
“But it’s imperative that President Trump harbor no illusions about Mr. Putin—about his character, ambitions, ideology, and his abiding hatred for American greatness,” he added.