Euronews asked Dutch MEP Thijs Reuten, who is the European Parliament’s shadow rapporteur on Ukraine and sits for the centre-left S&D group on the foreign affairs committee, what he thinks about potential rivalry between the US and EU over access to Ukraine’s mineral wealth.
ADVERTISEMENTAs president Volodymyr Zelenskyy headed for Washington to ink a deal on access to Ukrainian raw materials in exchange for as yet unspecified support from the US, Euronews asked Dutch MEP Thijs Reuten about the key geopolitical development as Russia’s war on the EU’s eastern neighbour enters its fourth year.
Euronews: Are you concerned about the apparent effort by the Trump administration to muscle out other partners and secure access to Ukraine’s mineral wealth, despite the EU and Ukraine having signed a strategic partnership deal in 2021, as Commission vice-président Stéphane Séjourné recalled this week?
Thijs Reuten: Trump’s approach to Ukraine leaves much to be desired, including the delusional blackmail in relation to raw materials that Trump attempted. I am glad that Europe has continued to stand side-by-side with Ukraine and its leadership, enabling it to negotiate with the Trump administration on fairer terms and conditions.
Russian imperial aggression means that this deal in practice is worthless without security guarantees for Ukraine.
Is there a danger a bilateral US-Ukraine deal could have implications for the EU’s ambition to increase supply chains to friendly countries, and could it affect Ukraine’s accession to the EU?
Ukraine understands that its relationship with Europe is a long-lasting partnership, not based on a Europe-First policy. The EU is eager for Ukraine to become a member of the EU and is willing to invest in the country’s economy because it benefits Ukraine and Europe. So no, this deal does not endanger Ukraine’s EU accession.
More broadly, do you sense that global competition for critical minerals is intensifying, and do you think it could fuel further geopolitical tension, or even war?
The global competition for critical minerals, and more broadly natural resources such as iron or even potable water, has been intensifying and driving conflicts for the last decades. My fear is that Trump, Putin and Jinping are all too eager to return to a power-based order while throwing away the international rules-based order that has acted as the guardrails for this competition. In Ukraine, once again Europe witnesses first-hand the sorrow that such politics bring.
What can the EU do to ensure both immediate stability and future access to critical minerals? Does the EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act remain fit for purpose, or will it need to be adjusted to the developing new political reality?
The EU needs to be stronger, bolder, faster and more courageous, but not at the expense of our principles. Our principles and lack of double standards should be our unique selling point – it is what makes the EU a desirable partner. We do not blackmail, strangle or extort other actors, but treat them fairly, as partners. For example, while we cannot depart from environmental standards, human rights and democratic processes in relation to the mining of critical raw materials, we should be willing to fully support these – politically, financially and technically.
