An energy expert has said that a new deal involving the United States and Ukraine is unlike anything he’s ever seen before.
Alan Riley, a law professor and energy expert at the Atlantic Council, told the Telegraph that the proposed deal—reportedly backed by Donald Trump allows the US to take control of a huge part of Ukraine’s energy resources while offering very little in return.
According to reports, the deal would give the US access to Ukrainian oil, gas, and rare minerals. It would also allow American companies and Trump-aligned investors to take over major parts of Ukraine’s energy system.
This includes things like pipelines, railroads, ports, energy plants, and processing facilities. Even though Ukraine would technically get 50% of the profits from these assets, they would only start seeing that money after their debts are paid off.
Professor Riley described the deal as “an expropriation document,” meaning the US would be taking ownership without offering proper protection or investment in return.
He said there are no clauses to defend Ukraine’s interests, no financial contributions from the US, and no real promises while the US could walk away anytime, Ukraine would be stuck. “I’ve never seen anything like it before,” he said.
One of the more controversial parts of the deal is that it gives the US the power to control where Ukraine sends its energy and minerals.
That could hurt countries like China or even Europe if their access is restricted. Trump reportedly believes that giving American businesses a strong presence in Ukraine would scare Russia off from further attacks.
However, this proposal is raising serious concerns. Ukrainian lawmaker Yaroslav Zheleznyak called it a “horror” in a post on Telegram.
He criticized the deal for not including any real security guarantees from the US and said he hopes Ukraine demands major changes.
Professor Riley also questioned whether this deal is designed to create conflict with the European Union.
He pointed out that the terms are not compatible with EU membership rules and wondered if that’s intentional, perhaps to force President Zelenskyy to say no to the offer.
Despite the concerns, the US side reportedly sees this deal as a way to help protect Ukraine without having to send troops. But critics argue that it could leave Ukraine vulnerable and overly dependent on the US, with little benefit in return.
