Ukraine has been struggling to determine its own future since the beginning of the war. But now things are changing. America sat down with Russia. Ukraine, on the other hand, has been pushed out of these talks. Its own future now depends on the bargaining of the great powers. The mines in the country have also become a subject of bargaining with Washington. In other words, the issue is no longer just about territory or security. Ukraine's economic resources are also part of this process. Three years have passed since Russia invaded Ukraine. During this time, Russian forces have increased their control of approximately 7% of Ukraine, including Crimea and some regions in Donbass controlled by Moscow-backed separatists, to 20%. At the beginning of the war, Russian troops advanced in Kherson, Zaporizhia and Donetsk in the east of the country. At the same time, they took control of Sumy, Chernihiv and Chernobyl in the north, and approached the capital Kiev by 20-25 kilometers. In March, the Russians were forced to retreat when the Ukrainian army launched a counter-offensive.

Thus, the capital is now far from the danger of falling. In the following days, we observe that the war continues in the east, the Russian forces are permanent here and do not pass to the west of the Dnieper. Imagine living in a country where your lands are occupied. You resist and fight against this occupation. Days, weeks, months and even years pass. At the end of three years, you have lost 20% of your country to a power greater than yourself. The external elements that supported you have now turned their backs and are trying to save their own skin. At this point, you may feel a little sold out and abandoned. This is exactly the situation Ukraine is experiencing right now.

The war that started during the Biden administration is slowly coming to an end. The Ukraine policy of the previous and current United States administrations has changed 180 degrees. The old government adopted a policy that it would continue to support Ukraine no matter how long it lasted. In other words, Washington would continue to provide aid to Kiev even if the war lasted much longer. However, compared to the situation at the beginning of the war, both the American people and Biden's views and policies on the war have changed. As time went by, Americans began to think that the aid given to Ukraine was excessive. According to a survey, 50% of Americans preferred that the war end as soon as possible, even if it meant that Ukraine would not be able to regain the lands it had lost. This rate showed a 7% increase compared to the survey in March 2024.

It is seen that the public is looking for a quick solution because the war is dragging on and has become a stalemate. Biden has also changed his tone over time. He changed his previous commitment to support Ukraine from "as long as it takes" to "as much as I can". This was because of obstacles in Congress. The Republicans' footsteps were now heard more closely. They were demands for stricter measures to be taken on immigration policies and for America to be prioritized. Another policy of Biden was the motto "Nothing can be decided about Ukraine without its participation". In other words, no decision regarding this country could be made without Ukraine's participation. This idea emphasized that Ukraine should have a say in its own future and territory. In the current process, there is an atmosphere as if an agreement will be made without him.

Trump had guaranteed that he would end the war 24 hours after taking office. He already knew that this would not happen. Wars do not end with the decision of a single leader. Considering Russia's goals and Ukraine's struggle for independence, the probability of a sudden agreement that one of the parties would accept is low. His real goal in making that statement was to force the parties to a quick solution by following a tough bargaining strategy at the negotiation table. Ultimately, the course of events will be determined by Russia and Ukraine's military situation and strategic calculations on the ground. Ukraine and Europe were sidelined in the talks held by America and Russia in Saudi Arabia.

The fact that Ukraine was not brought to the table in the negotiations where a future concerning their own lands was being drawn brings with it some question marks. Because they are one of the main parties to the conflict. It is quite uncertain whether their interests will be fully represented. The Kiev administration may not recognize the results of the peace talks to be held without him. So what will change? It is more likely that Ukraine's future will now be determined in line with the demands of America and Russia. Trump claimed that the war was started by Ukraine despite Russia's invasion. He said that Ukraine could have ended this war three years ago and made a deal earlier if it had not started. He also said that the public support for Zelensky had fallen to 4% and that elections should be held in Ukraine.

While describing Zelensky as a dictator, he accused him of fighting with the aid he received from America. On the contrary, he avoided describing Putin as a dictator. The reason he played on Zelensky may be that he wanted to put someone in power who would pursue the policies he wanted in Ukraine. Trump quickly changed his discourse on who started the war. He admitted that Russia attacked Ukraine. He stated that the attack was carried out on the orders of Russian leader Vladimir Putin. He said, "Russia attacked, but they should not have allowed Putin to attack." By these he meant Zelensky and Biden. America's pressure to get back its military and financial aid has further increased the tension between Trump and Zelensky.

The expectation of a quick agreement is forcing Ukraine to submit to peace and concessions. A total of 500 billion dollars is being demanded from Kiev. The reason for Trump's interest in mineral deposits is that he wants to obtain these minerals independently of China. Because China currently dominates the world market for rare earth elements. Zelensky initially refused to give away mineral deposits thought to be worth hundreds of billions of dollars. According to him, Western countries can access rich minerals. However, more talks are needed on this issue. In addition, Kiev is demanding security guarantees. The Ukrainian leader also argued that the figure is too high and that the total amount of American aid is around $100 billion.

There are reports that the US and Ukraine are close to reaching a mining agreement in the current process. So, what mineral deposits does the country have? Especially lithium, graphite, titanium, uranium and other rare earth elements are of strategic importance to the US. Titanium and lithium are among the most valuable minerals that Ukraine has. Before the war in 2022, Ukraine produced 6% of the world's titanium. Titanium is used in many areas, from missiles to aircraft and submarines. Ukraine has 3% of the world's lithium reserves. Lithium is especially important for America as a critical component for its batteries. However, commercialization of these minerals requires significant investments and long-term studies. Ukraine has to conduct new research in order to process these resources. Old maps from the Soviet Union period show research on these minerals. However, most of these maps are no longer considered valid.

Even if an agreement is made with the United States, Ukraine will have to make major investments to develop its mineral resources. It is also very difficult to start mining activities before security is ensured or the war ends. Most of the resources are located in the regions occupied by Russia. In other words, according to estimates, 20% to 40% of the mineral deposits are currently located in the Ukrainian territory controlled by Russia. This situation makes Ukraine's economic development process quite difficult. Russia, which controls these minerals, aims to gain a stronger position in the peace talks. As the mining areas they control increase, the possibility of Ukraine bargaining with these minerals will decrease.

Trump may also make a deal with Russia over the minerals. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov stated that they will not withdraw from the occupied regions of Ukraine. The question he posed was: "Should we leave the rare earth elements here and leave?" As the war draws to a close, Russia is expected to seize Ukraine’s remaining mineral resources. Trump’s advisors argue that Ukraine should abandon its goal of regaining Russian-held territory. Washington opposes Ukraine joining NATO. The US Secretary of Defense has stated that their position is that Ukraine should not join NATO. Ukraine, on the other hand, believes that it can also ward off future wars if it joins NATO. It sees a formal alliance with Western powers as the ultimate deterrent. If this happens, NATO will assume responsibility for the country’s security.

The logic is clear. With Ukraine joining NATO, any Russian attack will require a joint military response from all NATO members. Despite all this, Ukraine’s NATO ambitions face many obstacles. Some members are wary of direct conflict with Russia. Moscow also sees NATO expansion as a direct threat. Even Zelensky believes that NATO membership is not fully possible at the moment. Instead, he has made a new proposal to his Western allies. That is, America and Europe should send troops to Ukraine. However, the Washington administration is against sending American troops to Ukraine, which pushes Europe to take on greater responsibility.

For European countries, they are aware that the issue is no longer just supporting Ukraine, but also thinking about their own security. If Ukraine is left completely defenseless, there is a possibility that Russia will further advance its attacks. That is why the idea of ​​sending a military peacekeeping force to Ukraine is being discussed in European capitals. However, this is not an easy decision to make. The current front line of the war stretches for 804 kilometers. Ukraine's borders with Russia and Belarus are close to 3,218 kilometers. It is said that at least 40,000 to 200,000 soldiers are needed to ensure the security of this region. The number currently being discussed is around 50,000 soldiers. However, having such a large number of soldiers would require significant resources. This could strain the capacities of European countries.

On the other hand, Europe is not completely unanimous on this issue. So, who gives the green light to this idea, and who opposes it? France definitely supports it. It argues that it could play a role outside of war and potentially in the war. France has raised the idea of ​​sending non-combatant troops to Ukraine. The UK is considering deploying soldiers, especially for peacekeeping and training. Prime Minister Starmer stated that the talks are ongoing but that no final commitment has been made. It is stated that the British army is definitely ready to order its deployment to Ukraine. Germany believes that it is premature to discuss sending troops to Ukraine. First of all, they argue that they should wait and see whether and how peace will be achieved for Ukraine. Spain opposes it and thinks it is premature. Poland does not plan to send troops. Prime Minister Donald Tusk announced that there are no plans to send troops, citing public opposition and political risks. Italy opposes the idea, citing the possibility of a world war. It thinks support should be provided in different ways. The Netherlands seems to have given the green light but is cautious. It is considering future options. Belgium is not in favor of focusing on deploying troops on NATO's eastern flank. Estonia, on the other hand, considers that it could play a role outside of war. There are discussions on the subject within the country. Latvia has not yet mentioned plans. It is currently focused on its own defense. It hosts NATO troops. There is no sign that it will deploy troops to Ukraine. It prioritizes regional security. Denmark opposes it and thinks it is premature. Finland, while not ruling out deploying troops in the future, is currently focused on its own defense.

In Russia's eyes, Ukraine does not have enough weight on its own. In other words, it can make major concessions if it does not have support behind it. In short, Ukraine is at a disadvantage in negotiations without the support of a strong ally. It is said that America will consolidate its power within the framework of its current policy and play against China. In doing so, it will also want to draw Russia to its side. However, China was one of the countries that helped Russia the most during the Ukraine war. In other words, Beijing will try to keep Moscow on its side as much as it can. In this process, Putin may also seek to balance both sides.

Within the context of the Budapest Memorandum signed in 1994, Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees from America, England and Russia. In return, Moscow promised to respect Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. However, the steps Russia has taken since then are diametrically opposed to the promises it has made. After the annexation of Crimea, Ukraine is now on its way to making Kherson, Zaporizhia, Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine its own territory. Putin may order the Russian army to seize more territory in Ukraine to strengthen his hand at the negotiating table before any peace agreement.

Ukraine is considering whether it can continue to fight without American aid. According to Zelensky, this is unlikely. However, if the Putin-Trump agreement does not satisfy Ukraine, the country may be forced to do so. If an agreement is reached, it is expected that the lands it seized in Ukraine will now be completely under Russian control. Both sides are exhausted after three years of war. A peace agreement is highly likely in the near future.