9

Are there any recent historical examples of how mineral deals or other resource agreements affected security?

I am trying to use these historical examples to understand the possible implications, if any, of the US-Ukraine mineral deal on the future security of Ukraine.

The US-Ukraine mineral deal does not include any explicit security guarantees for Ukraine. The deal was touted as beneficial to the security of Ukraine, assuming that the US would be willing to protect its industrial interests there. But before the US-Ukraine mineral deal, there was also the 2017 US-Afghanistan mineral deal, also signed under Trump. That deal comes to mind as an example of how little, if any, influence, such resource deals have on the security of the partner country.

References:

While Trump opposes sending US troops to Ukraine to maintain an eventual peace agreement, “the United States would still desire to protect these massive investments, perhaps through other means” [...].

Digging into the US-Ukraine minerals deal - Atlantic Council, February 26, 2025

This Bilateral Agreement and the Fund Agreement will constitute integral elements of the architecture of bilateral and multilateral agreements, as well as concrete steps to establish lasting peace, and to strengthen economic security resilience and reflect the objectives set forth in the preamble to this Bilateral Agreement.

The Government of the United States of America supports Ukraine’s efforts to obtain security guarantees needed to establish lasting peace. Participants will seek to identify any necessary steps to protect mutual investments, as defined in the Fund Agreement.

The Kyiv Independent, February 26, 2025. The full text of the US-Ukraine mineral deal.

On September 22, 2017, Trump received the approval of the President of Afghanistan to enter into a “mineral deal,” the reserves of which in Afghanistan were then estimated at $1 trillion.

After reaching such an agreement with the Afghan government, Trump began secret negotiations with the enemies of the Afghan government – the Taliban.
...
Eventually, negotiations with the Taliban ended in the signing of the “peace agreement with the U.S.” – an agreement of betrayal of the government and the transfer of Afghanistan’s governance to the Taliban movement.

Trump needed at least eight rounds of secret talks with the Taliban to sign the deal, under which the U.S. would withdraw from Afghanistan, leaving the country to the Taliban.

The Taliban promised to behave decently and not commit repressions. How the U.S. “withdrew” from Afghanistan—we remember. How the Taliban behave—we also remember.

Ukraine Front Lines, March 3, 2025. How Trump has already signed rare earth deals and how it ended

Improve this question
3
  • 1
    Probably look at Africa. The Q might be a bit too broad though. Commented May 2, 2025 at 1:46
  • 1
    I've heard Australia has offered sufficient protection for East Timor to make it an independent state, once it has signed off its resources to Australia. Commented May 2, 2025 at 7:45
  • The problem is that the US will have no "industrial interests" there, since mining in the part still controlled by Kyiv is unprofitable. Zelenskyy played a cruel joke on Trump. Commented May 2, 2025 at 11:47

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
17
+100

Question:

Are there any recent historical examples of how mineral deals or other resource agreements ( between two countries ) affected security?

  • Saudi Arabia–United States: Oil-for-Security Alliance (1945–present). Effect on security: Long term US military presence in the Persian gulf. Affects U.S. foreign policy towards M.E. First Gulf war, Yemen conflict, Also complicates human rights and other tensions with Saudi: Khashoggi killing, 9/11 links.
  • China’s deals with Venezuela(oil), Sudan(oil), Myanmar(copper, jade, rare earths) Effect on security: Fueled conflicts, allowed military governments greater economic independence, ability to withstand international sanctions.
  • Russia–Germany: Nord Stream Gas Deals (2005–2022). Natural gas. Effect: Increased Europe's dependence on Russia's gas. Divided NATO over policy towards Russia; after Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia used gas as a weapon against Europe.
Improve this answer
3
  • Russia used gas as a weapon? Isn't that illegal? And I didn't realize they'd even attacked (western) Europe! Commented Jul 3, 2025 at 21:22
  • @RyanJensen After Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 Russia dramatically cut gas exports to Europe, especially through Nord Stream 1. Supplies via Ukraine and Poland were also reduced or halted. This caused: skyrocketing energy prices across Europe, fears energy shortages going into winter, and a scramble for alternative gas sources (LNG from the U.S., Qatar, etc.). The intent and effect was to pressure Europe to reduce support for Ukraine. Russia used Europes energy dependence as a weapon to threaten European lives going into winter and the European economy. Commented Jul 4, 2025 at 14:28
  • Sorry, it was a joke. I understand the natural gas situation Commented Jul 5, 2025 at 18:59
2

Sudan gold production has increased since the war started. About one ton of gold per week is exported. UAE is the primary conduit and broker.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/11/world/africa/sudan-gold-rush-heart-civil-war.html

"The R.S.F. has a ready market for its gold in the Emirates, where 2,500 tons of undeclared gold from Africa, worth a staggering $115 billion, were smuggled between 2012 and 2022"

That's $115 billion more than the Ukraine deal will generate.

Improve this answer
3
  • 3
    That is a good example of a resource deal. How was it supposed to affect security in Sudan and how did it actually affect it? Commented May 2, 2025 at 9:54
  • 1
    @quarague Exclusive: UN panel investigates Emirati links to seized weapons in Darfur : "investigating how mortar rounds exported from Bulgaria to the United Arab Emirates ended up in a supply convoy for Rapid Support Forces (RSF) militia fighters" Commented May 2, 2025 at 16:29
  • The quoted line mentions smuggling. Is there a mineral deal signed between UAE and Sudan ? Commented May 6, 2025 at 14:27
2

The infamous 2010 Kharkiv Gas Agreement between Moscow and Kyiv under the Yanukovych regime.

Russia achieved an extension of the lease of the Sevastopol naval base until 2042, and Ukraine received a new gas contract with a discount.

Instead of starting the process of liberating Crimea from the foreign military force, this agreement further strengthened the Kremlin’s dominant position, undermining Ukrainian sovereignty.

Improve this answer
0

The Panama canal the US helped to build. I consider this a resource for both Panama and the US as Panama is charging ships passing through the canal, and it is the United States' essential route that connects eastern and western US. POTUS has threatened to seize the canal if it does not reduce Chinese influence NYT.

Also, the US recently requested free transit for US ships in both Panama and Suez canals

Improve this answer
1
  • How did the Panama Canal affect Panama's security? Commented May 3, 2025 at 23:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.