World
U.S. Pressing Tough Demands in Revised Deal for Ukraine’s Minerals
Ukraine on Saturday was seriously considering a revised American proposal for its vast natural resources that contains virtually the same provisions that Kyiv previously rejected as too onerous, according to a draft document of the new proposal.
Some of the terms appear even tougher than in a previous draft.
The proposed agreement would significantly shift onto a mercantile footing the United States’ three-year alliance with Ukraine in the largest war in Europe since World War II. The conflict to date has largely been seen as a struggle to secure Ukraine and the European continent from an authoritarian threat from Russia.
The Trump administration’s terms could also strip Ukraine of funds that are now mostly invested in the country’s military and defense industry, and that could help rebuild the country once the war is over.
The terms of the new proposal, which is dated Feb. 21 and was reviewed by The New York Times, call for Ukraine to relinquish half of its revenues from natural resources, including minerals, gas and oil, as well as earnings from ports and other infrastructure. A similar demand was made in a previous version of the deal, dated Feb. 14 and reviewed by The Times.
Ukraine had been floating the prospect of a partnership with the United States on its valuable natural resources as a way to persuade Mr. Trump to provide additional support for its war effort. President Volodymyr Zelensky had also been seeking security guarantees for Ukraine, a condition that was absent in the first draft agreement presented to him last week, prompting him to decline to sign the deal.
But while the new document calls for a series of commitments from Ukraine it still does not provide any specific commitments in return from the U.S. to help Ukraine sustain its war effort. It says, however, that the United States intends to provide a long-term financial commitment to help Ukraine develop economically.
The new document states that revenues from Ukraine’s resources will be directed to a fund in which the United States holds 100 percent financial interest, and that Ukraine should contribute to the fund until it reaches $500 billion — the amount Mr. Trump has demanded from the war-torn country in exchange for American aid.
That figure far exceeds the country’s actual revenues from resources, which were $1.1 billion last year, and more than four times the value of U.S. aid committed to Ukraine so far. The $500 billion sum was not mentioned in the previous version of the deal, though Mr. Trump had said publicly that was what he wanted.
It is unclear whether Mr. Trump wants it in exchange for past American military and financial assistance, or whether it would also apply to future support.
Ukraine has not said whether it would agree to the deal under the proposed terms. Ruslan Stefanchuk, the speaker of Ukraine’s Parliament, told local media that a government-level group would begin working on the agreement on Monday and that Ukraine wanted to receive specific security guarantees in exchange for access to its resources.
Ukraine has tried to resist a total capitulation to American demands on natural resources, but has faced intense pressure from President Trump, who views access to Ukraine’s vast mineral wealth as necessary repayment for the billions the United States has provided Kyiv for its war against Russia.
The document suggests the United States may send more aid to Ukraine in the future — but at a high price. It states that Ukraine will be required to contribute to the fund a sum equal to twice the amount the United States might give to Ukraine after the deal is signed.
The revised proposal states that the United States could reinvest a portion of the revenue into Ukraine’s postwar reconstruction, including by investing in the development of the country’s subsoil assets and infrastructure.
The new draft agreement also includes provisions for revenues from territories currently occupied by Russia, in the event they were freed: The share of resource revenues contributed to the fund from liberated areas would be 66 percent. Russia currently occupies about a fifth of Ukraine’s territory, including significant portions of the resource-rich Donbas region.
The document reviewed by The Times outlines the establishment of a fund to receive revenues from resource extraction and other sources. A second agreement, described as the Fund Agreement, would be concluded later to work out specific details.
Keith Kellogg, Mr. Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine and Russia, visited Kyiv from Wednesday to Friday and discussed the new proposal with Mr. Zelensky. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent first met with Mr. Zelensky recently to discuss the deal, and more recently Mr. Trump’s commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, became involved the negotiations, according to a person familiarly with the discussion.
A potential deal for Ukraine’s resources has been a major point of dispute in a rapidly deteriorating relationship between Mr. Zelensky and Mr. Trump. Their interactions became acrimonious in the last week as the American president assailed Mr. Zelensky in highly personal terms, calling him “an unelected dictator.”
The Ukrainian president, in turn, said that Mr. Trump was living in a “disinformation web” after Mr. Trump falsely claimed that Ukraine had started the war against Russia.
Mr. Zelensky’s initial hesitancy, and comments that were perceived by Mr. Trump and cabinet officials as public criticism of the president prompted a fierce backlash from the Trump administration. That possibly led to the addition of further demands written into the agreement, according to drafts and people familiar with the discussions of the deal on the Ukrainian side.
Two of the people who had the new proposal described to them said that one of the few changes made by the United States that could satisfy Ukraine was the removal of a clause placing the deal under the jurisdiction of a New York court. The provision had raised concerns on the Ukrainian side, because it could weaken Ukraine’s legal standing in case of a dispute.
Whether Ukraine can meet the terms requested by the Trump administration is unclear.
Ukraine is not a major natural resource exporting country, as the most dynamic spheres of its economy have been agriculture, steel and other metal smelting and outsourced programming work for Silicon Valley companies. Revenues from natural resources comprised 2.5 percent of budget revenue last year.
Ukrainian officials and energy experts also say that any new fields would likely take years and significant investment to develop. Much exploration remains to be done to assess the true value of the country’s critical minerals, they say, and administrative and legislative obstacles still hinder foreign investment in the sector.
The Trump administration has suggested that the mere presence of American economic interests in Ukraine would be a security guarantee for Kyiv. Top U.S. cabinet members have pressed Mr. Zelensky to sign the deal in recent days.
“President Zelensky is going to sign that deal, and you will see that in the very short term,” the U.S. national security adviser, Mike Waltz, said on Friday. “And that is good for Ukraine. What better could you have for Ukraine than to be in an economic partnership with the United States?”
Speaking in the Oval Office later Friday, Mr. Trump said, “We’re going to either sign a deal, or there’s going to be a lot of problems with them.”
Maggie Haberman contributed reporting.
World
Video: How Venezuelans Worldwide Reacted to Overthrow of Maduro
new video loaded: How Venezuelans Worldwide Reacted to Overthrow of Maduro
By McKinnon de Kuyper
January 4, 2026
World
Trump says Cuba is ‘ready to fall’ after capture of Venezuela’s Maduro
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump late Sunday predicted Cuba was “ready to fall” after U.S. forces captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, warning that Havana can no longer rely on Caracas for security and oil.
Trump said Cuba’s fate is now directly tied to Maduro’s ouster and the collapse of Venezuela’s ability to bankroll allies in the region.
Asked if he was considering U.S. action in Cuba, Trump replied: “I think it’s just going to fall. I don’t think we need any action. Looks like it’s going down. It’s going down for the count.”
The president’s comments during a press gaggle with reporters aboard Air Force One come after Saturday’s capture of Maduro and his wife on charges tied to a narco-terrorism conspiracy. The audacious operation has sent shockwaves through allied governments in the region, with Cuban officials calling for rallies in support of Venezuela and accusing the U.S. of violating sovereignty.
MADURO AND ‘LADY MACBETH’ CILIA FLORES MARRIAGE SPELLS ‘WORST CASE’ CUSTODY SCENARIO
President Donald Trump speaks with reporters while in flight on Air Force One, Sunday, Jan. 4, 2026, as returning to Joint Base Andrews, Md. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
U.S. officials say Cuban security forces played a central role in keeping Maduro in power. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Cuban operatives effectively ran Venezuela’s internal intelligence and security operations – including personally guarding Maduro and monitoring loyalty inside his government.
Protestors rally outside the White House, Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026, in Washington, after the U.S. captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife in a military operation. (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo)
“It was Cubans that guarded Maduro,” Rubio said. “He was not guarded by Venezuelan bodyguards. He had Cuban bodyguards.”
Cuba’s government acknowledged Sunday that 32 Cuban military and police officers were killed during the American operation in Venezuela, marking the first official death toll released by Havana. Cuban state media said the officers had been deployed at the request of Caracas and announced two days of national mourning.
US CAPTURE OF MADURO THROWS SPOTLIGHT ON VENEZUELA’S MASSIVE OIL RESERVES
Trump confirmed Cuban casualties while traveling back to Washington.
“A lot of Cubans were killed yesterday,” he said. “There was a lot of death on the other side. No death on our side.”
Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores face ‘worst case scenario’ in U.S. custody, according to expert, with federal indictments on drug and weapons charges. ( Juan BARRETO / AFP via Getty Images)
Trump also took aim at neighboring Colombia, accusing its leadership of fueling drug trafficking into the U.S.
UN AMBASSADOR WALTZ DEFENDS US CAPTURE OF MADURO AHEAD OF SECURITY COUNCIL MEETING
“Colombia is very sick, run by a sick man who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States,” Trump said, adding that the country, “is not going to be doing it for a very long time.”
President of Venezuela Nicolás Maduro speaks during a military ceremony commemorating the 200th anniversary of the presentation of the ‘Sword of Peru’ to Venezuelan independence hero Simón Bolívar on November 25, 2025, in Caracas, Venezuela. (Jesus Vargas/Getty Images)
He suggested the U.S. was prepared to act against narco-trafficking networks operating by land and sea, citing recent interdictions.
Trump also revived his long-standing focus on Greenland, arguing the Arctic territory is critical to U.S. security amid growing Russian and Chinese activity.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security,” Trump said. “Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place.”
Trump has framed Saturday’s operation as part of a broader effort to reassert U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere, invoking the Monroe Doctrine and warning that hostile regimes can no longer rely on one another for survival.
Maduro is set to be arraigned in federal court in New York on Monday.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
World
Trump’s abduction of Maduro escalates concerns over potential war with Iran
Washington, DC – Hours after the United States announced the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, Israeli politician Yair Lapid issued a warning to Tehran: “The regime in Iran should pay close attention to what is happening in Venezuela.”
The forcible removal of Maduro from power came less than a week after US President Donald Trump met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and threatened to launch new strikes against Iran.
list of 3 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
Although Washington’s tensions with Caracas and Tehran have different roots and dynamics, analysts say Trump’s move against Maduro raises the prospects of war with Iran.
“A new lawlessness makes everything less stable and war more likely,” said Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC).
“Whether Trump becomes enamoured with ‘surgical’ regime change, or gives Netanyahu a US imprimatur for similar actions, it’s hard not to see how this gives momentum for the many actors pushing for renewed war with Iran.”
He added that Maduro’s abduction could prompt Iran “to do something that triggers military action”, including developing its own military deterrence or preempting US or Israeli strikes.
Negar Mortazavi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, also said the US actions in Venezuela show Trump’s maximalist aims, further dimming the chances of diplomacy.
“What I see and hear from Tehran is that they are not interested in negotiating with the Trump administration the way this administration signals that they want total surrender,” Mortazavi told Al Jazeera.
“So, not much chance for diplomacy at the moment, which then opens the path to the opposite road, that is conflict. Right now, Israel, Iran and the US are on a path to potential conflict.”
Abdi echoed that assessment. “This action reinforces every doubt and suspicion about US intentions, and gives more credence to those in Iran who say engaging the US is useless and [that] developing a nuclear deterrent is vital,” he told Al Jazeera.
Iran-Venezuela alliance
The US raid that abducted Maduro and brought him to the US came after months of intensifying rhetoric from Trump against the Venezuelan government.
US officials have accused Maduro of leading a drug organisation, and Trump and his aides have been increasingly arguing that Washington is entitled to Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also been emphasising Maduro’s ties to Iran, accusing Caracas, without evidence, of providing the Lebanese armed group Hezbollah a foothold in the Western Hemisphere.
Maduro is a close ally of Iran, and the two heavily sanctioned countries have been pushing to deepen their trade ties, which are estimated to be in the billions of dollars.
So, with Maduro gone, Iran’s small network of allies may shrink further, after the fall of leader Bashar al-Assad in Syria and the weakening of Hezbollah in Lebanon.
The Iranian government was quick to condemn the US attack on Venezuela, calling on the United Nations to intervene and halt the “unlawful aggression”.
“The US military aggression against an independent state that is a member of the UN represents a grave breach of regional and international peace and security,” the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.
“Its consequences affect the entire international system and will further expose the UN Charter-based order to erosion and destruction.”
On Saturday, Rubio suggested that Maduro’s abduction carried a message to all of Washington’s rivals in the Trump era.
“When he tells you that he’s going to do something, when he tells you he’s going to address a problem, he means it,” the top US diplomat told reporters.
But Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei doubled down on his defiant rhetoric after the US raid in Caracas.
“We will not give in to the enemy,” Khamenei wrote in a social media post. “We will bring the enemy to its knees.”
Trump’s threats
Last week, Trump hosted Netanyahu in Florida and threatened to bomb Iran again if the country rebuilds its missile or nuclear programmes.
“Now I hear that Iran is trying to build up again, and if they are, we’re going to have to knock them down,” Trump said. “We’ll knock them down. We’ll knock the hell out of them.”
Israel launched a war against Iran in June, killing the country’s top military commanders, several nuclear scientists and hundreds of civilians.
The US joined in the attack, bombing Iran’s three main nuclear sites.
While Trump has often reiterated that the US strikes “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear programme and celebrated the war as a success, the Iranian governing system survived the assault.
Tehran responded with barrages of hundreds of rockets against Israel, dozens of which penetrated the country’s multi-layered air defences, and Iranian forces were able to keep firing until the final moments of the war, before the ceasefire came into effect.
Some critics argue that regime change was and remains Israel’s goal in Iran, and Trump appears to be increasingly buying into that objective.
On Friday, Trump warned that the US is “locked and loaded” and ready to attack Iran if the Iranian government kills protesters amid the ongoing but sporadic antigovernment demonstrations across the country.
He renewed the same threat late on Sunday. “If they start killing people like they have in the past, I think they’re going to get hit very hard by the United States,” the US president said.
So, could the US carry out a Venezuela-style government decapitation in Iran?
NIAC’s Abdi noted that Israel has already tried to kill the country’s top leaders, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, in June.
Trump also repeatedly threatened Khamenei with assassination, and Israeli officials confirmed that they sought to “eliminate” the supreme leader during the war.
“Iranian officials have said they accordingly have plans in place so that killing or removing senior leaders does not paralyse or topple the regime,” Abdi said.
“It would be far messier to run a ‘snatch and grab’ operation on Iran, given their ability to retaliate against US interests and personnel.”
Venezuela without Maduro
Even in Venezuela, removing Maduro has not translated into a regime collapse, at least for now.
On Sunday, Vice President Delcy Rodriguez, now Venezuela’s acting president, stressed that Maduro remains the country’s only leader and condemned the US attack.
She also suggested that Israel was involved in the abduction of Maduro, a vocal critic of the US ally.
“Governments around the world are shocked that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has become the victim and target of an attack of this nature, which undoubtedly has Zionist undertones,” Rodriguez said.
Trump responded by threatening the acting Venezuelan president, telling The Atlantic magazine that she would pay a “very big price, probably bigger than Maduro” if she did not acquiesce to US demands.
So, the US president’s plans for “running” Venezuela and taking its oil are not complete yet, and will likely require more military action.
“I doubt Venezuela can be a ‘one and done’ or a quick ‘in and out’ situation, which is Trump’s favourite model. His brand is that he engages in quick shows of force, not forever wars,” Mortazavi said.
She cited swift operations that Trump has ordered, including the killing of ISIL (ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in 2019, the assassination of top Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in 2020, and the attack on Iran’s nuclear sites in June.
“Most Americans are tired of forever wars, especially in the Middle East, so the Trump administration knows they can’t sell more forever wars to Americans,” Mortazavi said.
But Trump has already floated the prospect of a ground invasion of Venezuela.
“We’re not afraid of boots on the ground,” he said. “We don’t mind saying it, but we’re going to make sure that that country is run properly. We’re not doing this in vain.”
Abdi said that a long-term US involvement in Venezuela could indirectly stave off war with Iran.
“There is also the possibility that the US gets bogged down in ‘running’ Venezuela and doesn’t have the bandwidth to wage, or to support Israel launching, the next Iran war,” he told Al Jazeera.
“Iran was next on the menu after the US invaded Iraq in 2003, and we know what happened there, and Trump may not want to pronounce ‘mission accomplished’ just yet.”
The oil question
Still, some critics – including Republican US Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene – have argued that if the US succeeds in controlling Venezuela’s oil resources, it will be able to offset energy market disruptions from a possible war with Iran.
“The next obvious observation is that, by removing Maduro, this is a clear move for control over Venezuelan oil supplies that will ensure stability for the next obvious regime change war in Iran,” Greene wrote on X on Saturday.
About 20 percent of the world’s oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran may push to shut down in the case of an all-out war.
Abdi said that Venezuelan oil “could theoretically provide some cushion” to the loss of exports from the Gulf region.
“But this would mean a lot of things going right for the US in Venezuela, and it is probably far too soon to make that judgement,” he said.
-
World1 week agoHamas builds new terror regime in Gaza, recruiting teens amid problematic election
-
Indianapolis, IN1 week agoIndianapolis Colts playoffs: Updated elimination scenario, AFC standings, playoff picture for Week 17
-
Business1 week agoGoogle is at last letting users swap out embarrassing Gmail addresses without losing their data
-
Southeast1 week agoTwo attorneys vanish during Florida fishing trip as ‘heartbroken’ wife pleads for help finding them
-
Politics1 week agoMost shocking examples of Chinese espionage uncovered by the US this year: ‘Just the tip of the iceberg’
-
News1 week agoRoads could remain slick, icy Saturday morning in Philadelphia area, tracking another storm on the way
-
World1 week agoPodcast: The 2025 EU-US relationship explained simply
-
News1 week agoMarijuana rescheduling would bring some immediate changes, but others will take time