The recently revealed peace framework, promoted by Donald Trump's team, is presented as a realistic map for ending the war and rebuilding Ukraine. However, behind the diplomatic terminology lies a highly strategic energy plan that could entrap Ukraine in a future dependent on fossil fuels, under US control for vital resources, while the European Union remains on the sidelines. This is not just a peace plan, but an energy agreement disguised as diplomacy.
Dependence on fossil fuels presented as reconstruction
According to leaks so far, the plan includes a long-term framework for economic cooperation that explicitly covers energy, natural resources, and industrial reconstruction. At first glance, it may seem like a necessary investment for a war-devastated country. In practice, however, it follows the same path charted earlier this year, when the US–Ukraine cooperation framework discreetly placed oil, natural gas, and other hydrocarbons at the center of future revenues for reconstruction.
This means that Ukraine is being encouraged to continue extracting fossil fuels instead of moving towards a renewable, hydrogen-based, and European-integrated energy model that would secure its long-term independence. In the short term, Ukraine may generate revenue from exporting more gas or opening new oil fields, but this commits its future to volatile global energy markets, exposes it to stranded-asset risks due to decarbonization, and solidifies a structural dependence on external investors and technology holders. Essentially, Ukraine is trading its energy future for the energy future of the US.
Privileged US access to Ukraine's natural resources
The deeper issue lies in how the plan organizes access to primary resources. Previous collaborations between Washington and Kyiv had already prioritized American companies for new extraction licenses and allowed half of Ukraine's future revenues from new natural resource projects to flow into a joint fund under American financial logic. The plan simply expands and solidifies this approach.
This creates an unpleasant reality. Ukraine, desperate for capital and military support, is being asked to cede significant control of its natural resources—from hydrocarbons to critical minerals such as lithium, graphite, titanium, and rare earths. The US secures strategic advantages in supply chains critical to defense, industry, and the "green transition," while Ukraine receives the coveted support and path to peace, but at the cost of long-term sovereignty over its strategic resources.
Further concern is raised by the implicit split between military support and political autonomy. According to the Financial Times, Zelensky warned that Ukraine may face a "very difficult choice" between maintaining dignity and risking the loss of a key partner. The pressure is real and is directly codified in the energy terms of the 28-point framework.
Europe is marginalized
For Europe, the consequences are profound. Ukraine is not just a neighbor, but central to its future energy architectural plan. A Ukraine rebuilt as a modern fossil fuel hub for US supply chains does not promote Europe's energy self-sufficiency. If the US dominates Ukraine's energy future, Europe's strategic position is weakened. The EU is turning into a "funder" rather than a "participant," supporting Ukraine's survival without determining its reconstruction. European industries will be outside the energy "game."
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών