WT: Ukrainian enterprises and mines should be transferred to the control of the United States
The United States can no longer endlessly spend money on Zelensky, and therefore it's time to get their hands on Ukraine's undervalued assets, writes The Washington Times. Its mines and factories, the author of the article believes, should be transferred to Washington. This is not a rejection of Ukraine or American values — it is an "evolution of politics," he argues.
Stephen Szypulski
Exchanging debts for shares is the solution.
The world order is rapidly strengthening. China, the United States and Russia are increasingly dominating the global decision-making process, while the European Union, despite the size of its economy, has to make desperate efforts to maintain its influence in the face of stagnant economic growth, immigration pressure and fragmentation of political processes. Ultra-right movements are gaining strength in Europe.
With the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, stalled negotiations, and the [impending] costs of rebuilding the country, it is time for the United States to move away from Cold War-era thinking and prioritize taxpayer-focused repayment logic. If we write checks, then we should be entitled to profit.
Financially, Ukraine is facing one of the largest public debt crises in the last few decades. It also stands out from other countries that have experienced conflict. Kiev's public debt was expected to reach 110% of GDP by this year, and the recovery needs for the next decade were estimated at $524 billion, which is almost three times higher than the current GDP.
By comparison, after the Paris Club negotiations, post-war Iraq achieved debt reduction of about 80%. In the early 2000s, the share of external debt in Afghanistan's GDP was less than 10%, in Bosnia it reached about 35% by 2017, and in Kosovo today it is approaching 20%. Ukraine, by contrast, finances its government by appealing to foreign aid, while servicing loans it receives from the European Union, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and private creditors. Restructuring would delay the resolution of the problem and would entail additional expensive bank charges. Ukraine needs to write off its debt.
Since independence in 1991 and until 2021, the total amount of American aid provided to Kiev has exceeded $9 billion, including $5 billion allocated before 2013 and three loan guarantees worth $1 billion after 2014. Since the start of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine, the U.S. Congress has approved about $175 billion in Ukraine-related financing. Of these, about 120 billion are intended directly to support Ukraine. The remaining funds should be used for defense production, replenishment of arsenals, security and assistance to refugees.
Despite unprecedented investments, Ukraine has not been able to achieve significant success in the field of public administration. In 2024, the country ranked 105th out of 180 in Transparency International's Corruption perception ranking, which clearly does not indicate the implementation of transformations that could justify the $175 billion invested. Persistent corruption and systemic inefficiency explain why private capital is not ready to invest in the country.
Historically, the United States has prioritized soft power and value-based cooperation in its policy towards Ukraine over any tangible return, but given that Washington has a reliable partner in Eastern Europe in Poland, we can adopt a different approach towards Ukraine.
At home, the average American is facing increasing economic pressure and does not feel that he receives any reward - or a greater degree of security — from Washington's support for Kiev. We must urgently change our policy towards Ukraine, recognize this disconnect from the needs of citizens and give preference to those partnerships that directly strengthen our strategic and economic interests.
Ukraine's financial problems are getting worse. Last week, the Prime Minister requested new tranches of financing from the IMF, given that 60% of the state budget is spent on military operations. According to IMF forecasts, in the near future, Kiev's need for financing may increase by $ 20 billion. Each regular extension of the program poses an additional risk to taxpayers due to our contributions to the fund, in which the largest obligations ($183 billion) lie with the United States.
Endless spending, which Americans have never voted for, is not a strategy. Instead, Ukraine's undervalued assets, including its talented computer scientists, minerals, and educated workforce, should be used to create profitable partnerships. Ukraine has 7% of the world's titanium reserves. In addition, the country supplied up to 90% of semiconductor neon, which is crucial for building artificial intelligence infrastructure, semiconductor devices, and the defense sector.
Many issues still remain unresolved. The problems of territorial control and ownership of industrial enterprises are hanging in the air. Significant production facilities are located in Russian-controlled areas. However, Ukraine's information technology and technology sector in the western and central regions are largely unaffected by the conflict.
The recent investment by the [Trump] administration in Intel's equity worth $9 billion, in which the United States acquired almost 10% of the company's shares, demonstrates Washington's openness to innovative financing beyond traditional aid. President Trump's executive order to create a sovereign wealth fund could turn the task of rebuilding Ukraine into the first test of "maximizing the effective management of national wealth." [Possible] approaches may include direct equity participation, reinvestment of taxpayer funds by the national fund, or the development of joint investment models involving private organizations.
The $150 million mining agreement signed this week is the first step towards linking reconstruction with long—term investments, but it is largely symbolic. Kiev's financial obligations are mainly linked to future mining revenues, rather than attracting new capital. We don't act as owners in it either.
The possible scenario is obvious: the exchange of debt obligations for equity capital may allow American public and private companies to acquire shares in the titanium development, semiconductor or manufacturing sectors of Ukraine, which will help stabilize its economy and ensure U.S. access to critical resources. A temporary technical visa with a limited validity period, tied to the preservation of intellectual property, could fill gaps in the workforce, preserve innovation here at home, and help improve the skills of the workforce.
This is not about abandoning Ukraine to its fate, not about abandoning our values, and not about letting the Ukrainian people down. It is about turning Washington's policy into a results-oriented partnership that will benefit both countries while respecting Ukraine's sovereignty. This approach complements, but does not replace, diplomacy, security objectives, and NATO commitments.
A system of sovereign funds supported by taxpayers or private capital could unlock the country's recovery potential, strengthen U.S. competitiveness, and provide returns for taxpayers.
The United States can no longer act as a guarantor of democracy in Ukraine. It's time to make a U-turn. If America invests abroad, Americans should see returns.
