Until the Oval Office meeting between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky went off the rails, it appeared that Zelensky was there to sign a deal requiring Ukraine to contribute 50% of future profits from its commodity mining to a fund jointly managed by the United States.
Instead, Zelensky’s repeated requests for at least some security guarantees culminated in a verbal assault from Trump and US Vice President J.D. Vance, and Zelensky left empty-handed.
What Ukraine was supposed to gain from the deal was never entirely clear. But 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 and Vance’s narrow characterisation, Ukraine is far more than a small, 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 it remains a major source of agricultural commodities, skilled labour, and technological innovation.
Podiums for the cancelled Trump-Zelensky joint press conference in the White House, Washington, 28 February 2025. Photo: EPA-EFE/JIM LO SCALZO
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 aluminium 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 Semen Tymoshenko, 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.
When it declared independence in 1991, Ukraine had 1.5 million troops and the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal.
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% of its heavy silo-based ICBMs.
Moreover, the Soviet Union’s first ICBMs were designed by a Ukrainian engineer, Serhiy Korolyov, 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 its military capabilities. When it declared independence in 1991, it had 1.5 million troops and a sizable 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 United Kingdom, and — ironically — Russia itself. Ukraine also agreed to divide the Black Sea Fleet, transferring or selling most of its ships to Russia.
Engineers build drones in Kyiv, Ukraine, 19 September 2023. Photo: EPA-EFE/OLEG PETRASYUK
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.
But Russia is determined to undermine Ukraine’s strength by draining its resources, forcibly conscripting tens of thousands of men — 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 (FPV) 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 tech sector, as evidenced by its state-of-the-art digital government platform, Diia, which was recently adopted by digitally savvy Estonia.
Ukrainian soldiers participate in training in the Donetsk region, Ukraine, 7 March 2025. Photo: EPA-EFE/MARIA SENOVILLA
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% 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 maize. 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 unfavourable ceasefire deal risks putting the country in Russia’s sphere of influence and enabling Putin to achieve his neo-tsarist 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 other countries beyond Ukraine. With the US now increasingly acting in Russia’s interests, supporting Ukraine is not just a moral imperative for Europe, it is an existential one.
Anastassia Fedyk is assistant professor of finance at the University of California, Berkeley and Emilia Marshall is a research fellow at Economists for Ukraine
This article was first published by Project Syndicate. Views expressed in opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the position of Novaya Gazeta Europe
The Russian government has banned independent media. We were forced to leave our country in order to keep doing our job, telling our readers about what is going on Russia, Ukraine and Europe.
We will continue fighting against warfare and dictatorship. We believe that freedom of speech is the most efficient antidote against tyranny. Support us financially to help us fight for peace and freedom.
By clicking the Support button, you agree to the processing of your personal data.
To cancel a regular donation, please write to [email protected]
VPNovaya
Help Russians and Belarusians Access the Truth