WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12, 2025
...concerning the minerals deal: We continue to be impressed by the apparent lack of knowledge (and reporting) concerning the "minerals deal."
What might be the current shape of that ever-elusive deal? Our renewed interest stems from the highlighted passage in this somewhat hopeful New York Times news report:
Ukraine Supports 30-Day Cease-Fire as U.S. Says It Will Resume Military Aid
Ukraine said it would support a Trump administration proposal for a 30-day cease-fire with Russia, an announcement that followed hours of meetings on Tuesday in Saudi Arabia, where the United States agreed to immediately lift a pause on intelligence sharing with Kyiv and resume military assistance.
The talks in the coastal city of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, brought new momentum to cease-fire negotiations that had faltered after a public confrontation at the White House between the Ukrainian and U.S. presidents.
The Trump administration had suspended all military aid and intelligence sharing in the aftermath of that combative meeting in Washington.
[...]
On Tuesday afternoon, Mr. Trump told reporters that he thought he would speak with Mr. Putin this week and that he hoped a lasting cease-fire would be negotiated in the coming days.
The joint statement on Tuesday said the United States and Ukraine had also agreed to conclude “as soon as possible” a deal to develop Ukraine’s oil, natural gas and mineral resources—an agreement that was put on hold after the Oval Office clash. That deal is intended to “expand Ukraine’s economy and guarantee Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security,” the statement said.
Say what? The U.S. and Ukraine "have agreed to conclude" the minerals deal "as soon as possible?" Is it just our imagination, or does that suggest that the terms of this massively under-reported deal may still be under negotiation?
Wha's the current shape of the minerals deal? We've been asking the following questions since the February 28 Oval Office debacle:
1) At that time, had Zelensky arrived in Washington expecting to sign the minerals deal? That had been the widely reported impression. Had that impression somehow been wrong?
2) Did a completed minerals deal actually exist at that time? If so, had it been changed from the original minerals deal—the deal Zelensky had refused to sign about one week before?
3) Why didn't the deal get signed that day, Oval Office debacle or not? Is it possible that the deal had been amended in such a way that the resident hotheads, Vance and Trump, no longer wanted to sign it?
We've been asking those questions for weeks. Today, we add this fourth set of questions:
4) Are the terms of the minerals deal still being negotiated? Is the deal still being changed? How many different forms of the minerals deal have existed over the past three or four weeks?
Also, why does everyone in the upper-end press seem to brush by such questions?
For what it's worth, we'll throw this additional log on the fire:
Three days ago, Courtney Kube of NBC News seemed to suggest that a deal exists, but that President Trump is refusing to sign it until he can "see a change in Zelenskyy’s attitude toward peace talks...including a willingness to make concessions such as giving up territory to Russia."
Kube has always struck us as notably sharp. If her general suggestion is accurate, that still leaves the basic question unanswered:
What the heck is actually in the current form of the deal?
It's easy to spot, and to assess, the news which gets reported. It can be harder to spot the news which doesn't get reported—the topics which go unexplored, undiscussed.
By conventional reckoning, this minerals deal started out as an attempt by the Oval Office 2 to loot the mineral wealth of Ukraine. By conventional reckoning, that was the shape of the original deal—and Zelensky refused to sign it.
What has happened to the deal since then? On the whole, largely uninquiring minds don't seem to want to know!
We were struck by that passage in the Times. What's up with the minerals deal?
The minerals deal is trivial and not news. Why is Somerby always preoccupied by meaningless stuff when there are actual current events happening, affecting many more people?
ReplyDeleteThe minerals deal has been presented as preliminary to any ultimate peace agreement, so it's pretty important.
DeleteSilly. It’s Trump’s Ukrainian Shakedown Part Deux.
DeleteThere's no Ukraine. Since February 22, 2014.
DeleteIt has ceased to be, bereft of life, it rests in peace, it has kicked the bucket, hopped the twig, bit the dust, snuffed it, breathed its last, and gone to meet the Great Head of Light Entertainment in the sky.
There’s no Russia. It’s now Putinia.
Delete@4:01 Actually it’s your Ukrainian shakedown and mine. Trump is our negotiator, but we’re the ones getting the benefit.
DeleteFuck you, Dickhead in Cal.
DeleteGo play with your fellow maggots, Dickhead, even though you think you're better than them. You're not.
DeleteWhat benefit are you getting, David?
Delete@7:13 -- The money Trump extorts from Ukraine goes to pay for goods and services from my government or to help reduce the national debt.
DeleteHo-hum.
DeleteMore Socialism from David in Cal (the Karl Marx of the 21st Century).
The important thing is that extorting money from Ukraine is far more acceptable than Donald Trump and the billionaire class paying taxes.
Delete
ReplyDelete"What the heck is actually in the current form of the deal?"
The "deal" has always been more or less the same: the money received by the Kiev regime from natural resources, infrastructure, and other assets, will be deposited to a fund, with a nice name, owned and controlled by the US government. That's all.
It's sorta like if you, Bob, and I made a deal, where you give me all your money.
Right, and if they start skimming off the top, we send Luca Brasi and Rocco over there to send a message.
DeleteYou don't need to send anyone. If the fund with a nice name is not getting filled fast enough, I would just seize assets (illegally obtained, obviously) of this or the next clown sitting in Kiev's equivalent of the Führerbunker.
DeleteOr we can throw a couple of Ukrainians out a window, that seems to work with Uncle Vlad.
Delete"the money received by the Kiev regime from natural resources, infrastructure, and other assets'
DeleteSo you think this explains the deal? Here's a couple of outstanding questions:
What does it mean to get $ 'from natural resources'? Which natural resources? Are you saying Ukraine is going to sell off its forests and hand the proceeds to the US?
What does it mean to 'receive' money from 'infrastructure'? Same question for 'other assets'.
Bob's question remains unanswered.
Can't you figure it out yourself 3:34 PM?
DeleteTaxes, licensing fees, usage fees, etc. Land, seaports, airwaves, overflight, oil, gas, etc. Yes, forests.
How about Ukraine’s famous wheat fields?
DeleteThat sounds like the deal Zelensky refused to sign.
DeleteDOGE FROM THE INSIDE
ReplyDeleteSince the arrival of a DOGE team, Social Security is in a far more precarious place than has been widely understood, according to Leland Dudek, the acting SS commissioner.
When a participant in a recent meeting asked why he wouldn’t more forcefully call out President Trump’s continued false claims about widespread Social Security fraud as “BS,” Dudek answered, “So we published, for the record, what was actually the numbers there on our website. This is dealing with — have you ever worked with someone who’s manic-depressive?”
Here's what a human pile of shit does:
ReplyDelete" The FBI has told Citibank that recipients of EPA climate grants are being considered as potentially liable for fraud. That is, the Trump administration wants to criminalize work on climate science andimpacts."
Trump says Chuck Schumer is no longer Jewish.
ReplyDeleteTrump doesn’t understand that many Jews oppose Israel’s cruelty toward Palestinians.
DeleteDemocrats are fighting to keep a Hamas supporter who wants to murder Jews and organized demonstrations calling for the murder of Jews in the United States.
ReplyDeleteIn case you’re wondering why your “Trump is Hitler” bullshit is ignored and why everyone thinks you’re depraved.
That was Vance calling Trump Hitler. But otherwise, your comment is a complete lie.
DeleteVance was wrong. Trump isn't Hitler. He's Mussolini.
DeleteThere is no reason to ignore JD Vance for calling Trump "Hitler". We're already ignoring him, because he's a standard-issue Right-wing piece of shit.
DeleteWhy is it that no Republican voter cares about the deficit?
ReplyDeleteRepublican voters care very much about the deficit during Democratic administrations and also when they can argue that extorting money from an ally is necessary to address the problem. Otherwise they care about giving tax breaks to their donor class more than anything. That is why they absolutely suck at economics as historical data unequivocally shows.
Deletehttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I8BMtWCANdM
DeleteThe current situation in a nutshell.
Yes, good video. We're living in a nightmare. Musk goes on these shows and just lies his fucking ass off without any pushback.
DeleteOperation 49:
ReplyDeleteTrain Initiate: Fanny Blowind
As a content creation agency, we understand the importance of clear and impactful communication in shaping narratives and fostering understanding on critical global issues.
ReplyDeleteGo ahead and have a " come to Jesus" talk with Somerby then.
Delete