Legal experts have identified gaps in a framework agreement that outlines U.S. access to Ukraine’s natural resources in exchange for security guarantees. The deal, set to be signed between the countries’ leaders, lacks specific commitments and details regarding the management of a joint investment fund. Despite the absence of concrete security assurances, the terms of the agreement may be viewed positively by both sides, with potential for further negotiations to solidify the agreement. One notable aspect of the draft is its mention of avoiding conflicts with Ukraine’s EU aspirations, signaling potential political support. The deal aims to secure Ukraine’s resources and reduce reliance on Chinese materials, with the possibility of future negotiations leading to a binding treaty.
“The open nature of the discussion was highlighted by Tim Meyer, an international law professor at Duke University, who stated, ‘The agreement leaves room for debate.’ He noted that there is some uncertainty within the U.S. government regarding the authority to intervene in the fund as outlined in the agreement, suggesting that obtaining congressional approval would likely be necessary for a negotiated fund agreement to proceed. Meanwhile, Guillermo Christensen, an expert in national security and international trade at the U.S. law firm K&L Gates, described the framework as presenting ‘a unique and unprecedented approach’ not typically observed in other national agreements. This insight was shared by reporters Stephanie van den Berg in The Hague, Tom Balmforth in London, Blake Brittain in Washington, and David Thomas in Chicago, with writing by Anthony Deutsch and editing by Mike Collett-White and Rod Nickel.”
