Edit: I meant to leave this empty to start, but to clarify now that there’s other discussion:
“Access to minerals” doesn’t necessarily mean “discounted” or “mineral rights”. It could be a deal consisting of:
- Military aid goes to EU defence industry supplies
- In exchange, EU gets first dibs at market rate contracts (with some tax-exempt on on the EU side for imports to make it more appealing to take advantage of on both sides) for metals/mineral extraction.
This could help spur Ukraine’s post-war economy, integration with EU markets, and benefit the EU defence industry. It would also demonstrate what a real and fair deal looks like.
Any deal starting with a clause about minerals will sound like extortion. I’m not against a mineral deal, but first things first: Security.
Once a viable security deal (with enforcement) has been reached, I’m sure a mineral deal will happen naturally.
I completely disagree because Ukraine is at a huge disadvantage to make any deals right now. They defend our borders too and need support regardless. So unless they offer a deal, we shouldn‘t even think about it.
As a member of the EU and a European Defense Alliance, Ukraine could bring its minerals and a lot of material and immaterial resources I guess.
Why do you want us to stoop to Trump’s level?
If done how OP proposes, this isn’t really taking advantage of Ukraine at all.
It’s mostly just forming a strategic partnership and making sure EU companies are financially invested in Ukraine which will result in political pressure for lasting peace and EU aid.
If done how OP proposes, this isn’t really taking advantage of Ukraine at all.
Yeah, he add additional info after my comment (was just the title before).
ah gotcha
My focus is also on delegitimizing bullshit deal proposals with something fair :)
Either way it sounds like an extortion and protection mony for me.
There are two countries in eu that has troops to deploy: france and uk. The rest of us have defence forces only
Where would military equipment to rival the one from the US come from?
Edit: Did a quick search on the largest military manufactors and out of the top 10, 1 is English, 3 are Chinese and the remaining 6 are American, so none are European.
If the US decides that Europe can’t buy equipment they are in a good position to do so.
There are some relevant european defense contractors. Maybe not in the Top 10 worldwide, but we do have a capable defense industry here.
- #13 Leonardo (italy)
- #14 Airbus
- #17 Thales Group (france)
- #23 Dassault
- #26 Rheinmetall
Revenue means jack shit, for the most part US gear buys US favour, on the ground, it’s pretty shit despite being stupidly expensive. I’ll take a Grippen or Stridsvagn every day of the week. Also, with the rearmament, all of these companies will grow substantially.
This is basically what I was thinking. “Access to minerals” doesn’t necessarily “access without market cost”. It could be a deal consisting of:
- Military aid goes to EU defence industry supplies
- In exchange, EU gets first dibs at market rate contracts (with some tax-exempt on on the EU side for imports) for metals/mineral extraction
I think what Ukraine needs most is a stable and secure environment. Nobodly wants to invest in an area where there could be war next month.
Where would military equipment to rival the one from the US come from?
We don’t have it yet. Absolutely no question. Not really sure why folks are arguing otherwise.
Russian capacity to produce military equipment far outstrips Europe. EU have been pumping grant money into building capacity since 2022 but I’m not sure how far it’s come.
How we’re not on a war footing since the invasion and especially since it became clear that at best the US election was a toss up I will never understand.
