Until the Oval Office meeting between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy went off the rails, it appeared that Zelenskiy was there to sign a deal requiring Ukraine to contribute 50 percent of profits from its commodity mining to a fund jointly managed by the US. Instead, the Ukrainian leader’s repeated requests for at least some security guarantees culminated in a verbal assault from Trump and US Vice President J.D. Vance. Zelenskiy left empty-handed.
What Ukraine was supposed to gain from the deal was never entirely clear. Whatever the details, Ukraine’s value cannot be reduced to a mineral transaction. The country’s fate could reshape the geopolitical order, potentially shifting the balance of power, in Europe and beyond, for decades to come.
Despite Trump’s and Vance’s narrow characterization, Ukraine is far more than a mineral-rich country fighting off a much larger aggressor. Ukraine was a pillar of Soviet military power during World War II and the Cold War, and remains a major source of agricultural commodities, skilled labor and technological innovation.
Russian President Vladimir Putin understands Ukraine’s strategic value, seeing it as critical to his neo-imperialist project. Before and after World War II, Ukraine was a key hub of the Soviet Union’s military-industrial complex, manufacturing aircraft, ships and tanks, along with the aluminum and steel needed to build them.
The iconic T-34 tank, a mainstay of the Soviet army during World War II, was produced in Kharkiv, while Mykolaiv’s shipyards manufactured the Soviet Navy’s most formidable cruisers and submarines.
Ukraine contributed enormously to the war effort. Seven million Ukrainian soldiers — more than one-fifth of the Red Army — fought against Nazi Germany. Many were senior officers, including Marshal Semyon Timoshenko, a key architect of the Soviet victory.
Ukraine’s strategic importance grew during the Cold War. Ukrainian physicists were at the forefront of nuclear science, conducting the Soviet Union’s first successful nuclear-fission experiments, designing viable nuclear explosives and laying the foundation for the Soviet nuclear-weapons program.
Beyond research, Ukraine was a major producer of nuclear missiles. It produced some of the Soviet Union’s most powerful intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), including the R-36, dubbed “SS-18 Satan” by NATO. Ukraine remained integral to Russia’s nuclear arsenal well into the 2010s, having manufactured 15 percent of its heavy silo-based ICBMs.
Moreover, the Soviet Union’s first ICBMs were designed by a Ukrainian engineer, Sergei Korolev, while he was a political prisoner. After his release, he became the Soviet Union’s chief rocket designer, leading the team that launched Sputnik 1, the world’s first satellite, and sent the first probes to the moon and the first human into space.
Despite Russia’s claim to be the Soviet Union’s sole heir, Ukraine inherited a significant share of the USSR’s military capabilities. When it declared independence in 1991, it had 1.5 million troops and a sizeable naval fleet.
It also had the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal, but under international pressure, Ukraine agreed to relinquish its warheads to Russia in exchange for security guarantees from the US, the UK, and — ironically — Russia itself. Ukraine also agreed to divide the Black Sea Fleet, transferring or selling most of its ships to Russia.
Even after voluntarily giving up much of its military power, Ukraine remains strategically vital, owing to its vast agricultural, natural and industrial resources. Moreover, its resistance to Russian tyranny has forged the most skilled and battle-tested military force in Europe.
However, Russia is determined to undermine Ukraine’s strength by draining its resources, forcibly conscripting tens of thousands of soldiers — particularly ethnic minorities — from the territories it occupies. More than 43,000 people from Crimea and 48,000 from eastern Ukraine have been sent to fight for Russia.
Meanwhile, Ukraine’s natural wealth is being plundered, with Russia seizing control of rare earth deposits concentrated in the regions under its occupation.
If Ukraine were to fall under Russian control, it would significantly bolster Russia’s military-industrial base. Ukraine has emerged as a leader in first-person view drone technology, using air drones to strike Russian ammunition depots and marine drones to cripple Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.
Beyond warfare, Ukraine has a dynamic technology sector, as evidenced by its state-of-the-art digital government platform, Diia, which was adopted by tech-savvy Estonia.
Abandoning Ukraine, as the US appears intent on doing, would have far-reaching global consequences. Known as the “breadbasket of Europe,” Ukraine is one of the world’s top agricultural exporters. Subjugating it would give Russia control over 12 percent of all calories traded worldwide, including one-third of the world’s wheat, half of its sunflower oil, one-quarter of its barley and one-fifth of its corn. It would also give Putin control over Ukraine’s coal and natural-gas reserves.
Ukraine’s immense industrial and human resources once helped make the Soviet Union a global power. Now, an unfavorable ceasefire deal risks putting the country in Russia’s sphere of influence and enabling Putin to achieve his neo-czarist dream.
With access to Ukraine’s military strength, industrial capacity, and natural, human and technological resources, Russia could transform itself from a debilitated country with a smaller economy than Texas into a far more dangerous adversary capable of threatening many countries beyond Ukraine. With the US increasingly acting in Russia’s interests, supporting Ukraine is not just a moral imperative for Europe, it is an existential one.
Anastassia Fedyk is an assistant professor of finance at the University of California, Berkeley. Emilia Marshall is a research fellow at Economists for Ukraine.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS