The Dictatorship

Ukraine balks at White House’s call to give up its rare earth minerals

Published

1 year ago

February 18, 2025

Ukraine balks at White House’s call to give up its rare earth minerals

Over the course of the last decade, Donald Trump’s line on the 2003 invasion of Iraq has evolved more than once, but there’s one claim he’s repeated ad nauseum: The United States, the Republican has long argued, should’ve kept Iraq’s oil as part of the war. After the president deployed U.S. troops to Syria, Trump insisted that his administration actually did take and keep Syrian oil.

He was, of course, brazenly lyingbut the false claims reflected a sentiment he appeared to take quite seriously: Foreign policy interventions, from Trump’s perspective, should be inherently transactional. If the United States deploys military resources abroad, the argument goes, then it stands to reason that American officials are entitled to other countries’ natural resources.

That’s not at all how U.S. foreign policy has ever worked in this country, and just an approach isn’t altogether legal under international law. By all appearances, Trump has never cared.

With this in mind, it probably shouldn’t surprise anyone that the Republican White House believes Ukraine should also turn over some of its natural resources to the United Statesin exchange for the security aid we’ve provided to our ally.

At least for now, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy didn’t appear especially receptive to the idea. NBC News reported:

The Trump administration has suggested to Ukraine that the United States be granted 50% ownership of the country’s rare earth minerals, and signaled an openness to deploying American troops there to guard them if there’s a deal with Russia to end the war, according to four U.S. officials. Rather than pay for the minerals, the ownership agreement would be a way for Ukraine to reimburse the U.S. for the billions of dollars in weapons and support it’s provided to Kyiv since the war began in February 2022, two of the officials said.

When presented with proposed deal, Zelenskyy declined to sign it. The Ukrainian president did, however, say that he would examine the offer in more detail.

Of course, the fact that the Trump administration even put such a proposal on the table is quite extraordinary. The United States didn’t defend our ally against a deadly invasion because we expected Ukrainians to give up its natural resources; we defended our ally because it was in our geopolitical interests to do so.

There was no need for a transaction — at least until Trump returned to power.

Time will tell what, if anything comes of this, but in the meantime, the Republican president and his administration are moving forward with plans for peace talks, beginning with negotiations in Saudi Arabia. There’s some uncertainty about the degree to which Ukrainian officials will be involved in the process, but Zelenskyy declared at a security conference in Germany over the weekend, “Ukraine will never accept deals made behind our backs.”

For his part, Trump said a day later that Zelenskyy “will be involved” in the negotiations — he didn’t say when, how, or to what degree — and went on to talk about how impressed he is with Russian military might.

“They have a big, powerful machine, you understand that?” the American president saidreferring to Putin’s military. “And they defeated Hitler and they defeated Napoleon.”

It was the latest in a series of pro-Russia comments that Trump has made in recent days.

Steve legs

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an BLN political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

The Dictatorship

US is ready to help end the ‘senseless war’ in Ukraine but no quick deal ahead, Rubio says

Published

1 hour ago

July 24, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

US is ready to help end the ‘senseless war’ in Ukraine but no quick deal ahead, Rubio says

MANILA, Philippines (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Thursday that the Trump administration is poised to help end the “senseless war” in Ukraine but acknowledged there is no quick path to a deal, saying diplomacy will require sustained effort and new ideas.

Rubio, who held talks with his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov in the Philippine capital, alluded to how U.S.-mediated talks have stalled. He called them “unsuccessful or at least unfruitful” in the past but insisted that President Donald Trump was committed to the work “if conditions and factors have changed to make that possible.”

“That’s been the challenge — an end that both sides can accept,” Rubio told reporters. “We’ve tried and we’ll continue to try to see if we can, you know, find a middle ground that brings this about. And we’re prepared to play that role if the opportunity presents itself.”

Rubio met Lavrov and several other leaders, including China’s foreign minister, on the sidelines of an annual gathering by foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Manila.

America’s top diplomat said the U.S. is focused on Asia even as it steps up fighting with Iran, seeks a pathway to end Russia’s war in Ukraine and pressures the Cuban government to make changes.

ASEAN talks focused on international conflicts

Three days of closed-door talks that started Tuesday have centered on the escalating fighting in the Middle East and tensions in the South China Seawhere a new clash flared Thursday.

“There’s always going to be a concern that America is so focused on one place that it can’t focus on another,” Rubio said. But he noted that the U.S. remains “engaged in Asia every single day,” citing strong partnerships and economic ties across the region.

After meeting with Rubio, Lavrov largely ignored questions from reporters. The Russian Foreign Ministry in Moscow said he emphasized to Rubio “the unacceptability of further arming” Ukraine and accused European countries of pursuing Russia’s “strategic defeat.”

Lavrov reiterated Russia’s readiness for “a political and diplomatic resolution of the conflict” and commitment to agreements reached at a summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Trump in Alaska last year, the Russian ministry said.

But Rubio said “we’ll have to find new suggestions and new ideas” that are acceptable to both sides. There has been no change to Washington’s military support for Ukraine, with weapons being purchased by NATO allies and transferred to the war-ravaged country, he said.

Separately on Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reiterated that his priority is finding a way to get back to negotiations.

Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.

U.S. efforts to broker an end to the Russia-Ukraine war have been overshadowed by the outbreak of the Iran war earlier this year. Renewed strikes by Washington and Tehran have been intensifying after an interim ceasefire deal collapsed.

“The price will continue to get higher every single night until they come to their senses,” Rubio said. He insisted Tehran is “begging” for talks but Trump does not see the use in responding because “Iran is clearly not ready to make a deal, at least not one they’re willing to live by.”

Trump has warned Iran that the U.S. will destroy one Iranian bridge or power plant each time Iran shoots at a ship in the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi responded by saying the country’s defense doctrine was an “eye for an eye.”

“The president’s policy is a head for an eye,” Rubio said. “They will pay a very heavy price for the things they’re doing.”

China defends maritime military actions

Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong renewed her country’s alarm over the Chinese navy’s recent test-launch of a missile from a nuclear-powered submarine in the region, saying the lack of notification to the Philippines and Pacific nations where the missile flew over and landed was destabilizing.

“It comes in the context of a rapid military build-up of China’s nuclear arsenal without the transparency or reassurance the region expects,” Wong told a university forum in Manila on Thursday. “This is why Australia has described the test as provocative and destabilizing.”

China has defended its actions, saying the launch was part of annual exercises and that it gave countries in the area appropriate notice in advance.

Rubio met Wednesday with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and said they discussed a new altercation this week between Chinese and Filipino forces in a disputed shoal in the South China Sea, which Beijing claims virtually in its entirety. Rubio called the incident “escalatory.”

“Those need to be managed very carefully, because obviously, a conflict — be it economic or otherwise — between the U.S. and China would have a dramatic global impact,” Rubio said.

He also said they talked a lot about Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s planned trip in September, noting he believes Xi will have a “very positive visit when he comes to Washington.”

In Beijing, the Chinese coast guard said it took necessary measures, including monitoring and blocking, to drive away two Philippine ships that disregarded repeated warnings from the Chinese side in a fresh confrontation Thursday. China said its operations were professional and lawful and urged the Philippines to stop its provocative actions infringing on Chinese territory.

The Philippine coast guard, however, said the two fishing vessels were harassed while bringing fuel aid to Filipino fishermen in the Scarborough shoal. It said a Chinese coast guard ship tried to spray one vessel with a powerful water cannon but missed, calling these “illegal, coercive and aggressive actions.”

The Trump administration has repeatedly criticized China’s assertive actions in the South China Sea to the disadvantage of smaller claimant countries like the Philippines, Washington’s oldest treaty ally in Asia. Taiwan and ASEAN members Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei have also been involved in the often-tense territorial standoffs.

ASEAN aims to conclude yearslong negotiations with China on a proposed non-aggression pact by this year, according to a draft of a joint communiqué seen by The Associated Press. The code of conduct aims to prevent a major conflict in the disputed waters, a key global trade route, that could draw in the United States.

___

Associated Press journalists Eileen Ng in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Ken Moritsugu in Beijing, Haruka Nuga in Bangkok and Fu Ting in Washington contributed to this report.

The Dictatorship

US and Saudi Arabia sign new nuclear agreement that could pave way for kingdom to enrich uranium

Published

19 hours ago

July 24, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

US and Saudi Arabia sign new nuclear agreement that could pave way for kingdom to enrich uranium

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. and Saudi Arabia on Wednesday forged a new agreement that could potentially provide the kingdom with uranium enrichment capability for its civilian nuclear program.

U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Minister of Energy Abdulaziz bin Salman formally signed the nuclear cooperation agreement, known as a “123 agreement,” alongside what the Trump administration described as a “bilateral safeguards agreement.”

The U.S. administration released scant details of the deal, but the framework paves the way for the building of a uranium enrichment facility in Saudi Arabia after a joint U.S.-Saudi study, according to a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

“These agreements reflect our two nations’ shared commitment to strengthening U.S.-Saudi commercial relations, delivering prosperity at home and security to our allies abroad,” Wright said in a statement. “Rest assured, these agreements uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and nonproliferation, while relying on the world’s best nuclear technology and scientists, designed right here in the United States.”

Earlier, Secretary of State Marco Rubio sought to head off emerging criticism of the decision under questioning by reporters about the risk that helping the Saudis fulfill their long-standing desire to enrich their own uranium could lead to new rounds of nuclear proliferation and competition in a volatile region.

“The U.S. is not going to reach any agreement with any country in the world that leads to the risk of proliferation,” said Rubio, who was traveling in the Philippines on Wednesday.

The agreement does not include the International Atomic Energy Agency ‘s Additional Protocol, which would allow for more monitoring, inspections and verification, according to a second person familiar with the decision.

The deal is expected to last 30 years and involve U.S. firms in developing the program. The Energy Department in a statement said it will be submitted for review to Congress, where it could face opposition.

The oil-rich kingdom’s Energy Ministry said the agreement bolsters “efforts to diversify energy sources, advance cutting-edge technologies, and expand opportunities for cooperation and investment in ways that serve the mutual interests of the two friendly countries.”

The announcement comes during the war against Iran launched by the U.S. and Israel, in part, to wipe out Tehran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon. Iran has insisted its nuclear enrichment program is peaceful.

Ahead of the announcement, Alexander Bollfrass, a nuclear expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, called the deal “a revolutionary new approach” to nuclear nonproliferation policy.

“The revolutionary aspect of this agreement is that the United States is not asking Saudi Arabia to abide by the highest possible safeguards, internationally monitored safeguards that are standard and are available today, but instead is willing to at least theoretically transfer highly sensitive technology without the same level of oversight that one would expect,” Bollfrass said.

President Donald Trumpduring his first term, and former President Joe Biden tried to reach a nuclear deal with the kingdom to share American technology.

Enrichment could open the door to weaponization

Nonproliferation experts warn any spinning centrifuges within Saudi Arabia could open the door to a possible weapons program for the kingdom, something its assertive de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salmanhas suggested he could pursue if Tehran obtains an atomic bomb.

Wright traveled to Saudi Arabia last year shortly before Trump visited and discussed building out the kingdom’s commercial nuclear power industry with his Saudi counterpart. The U.S. Department of Energy has not responded to multiple requests for comment.

Already, Saudi Arabia and nuclear-armed Pakistan signed a mutual defense pact after Israel launched an attack on Qatar targeting Hamas officials. Pakistan’s defense minister then said his nation’s nuclear program “will be made available” to Saudi Arabia if needed, something seen as a warning for Israel, long believed to be the Middle East’s only nuclear-armed state.

Some lawmakers are hesitant about giving Saudis enrichment capability

Enrichment isn’t an automatic path to a nuclear weapon — a nation also must master other steps, including the use of synchronized high explosives, for instance. But it does open the door to weaponization, which has fueled the West’s concerns over Iran’s program.

The United Arab Emirates, a neighbor to Saudi Arabia, signed a 123 agreement with the U.S. to build its Barakah nuclear power plant with South Korean assistance. But the UAE did so without seeking enrichment, something nonproliferation experts have held up as the “gold standard” for nations wanting atomic power.

Rubio, as a Republican senator representing Florida, backed a bipartisan 2018 proposal that called for requiring Congress to approve any 123 agreement with Saudi Arabia. The bill was reintroduced by a group of Democratic lawmakers in March but has not passed into law.

Typically, 123 agreements — which authorize U.S. companies to sell nuclear technology abroad — go into effect unless veto-proof majorities of Congress pass joint resolutions of disapproval.

Rosemary Kelanic, the Middle East director at Defense Priorities, a Washington think tank, said that uranium enrichment capability could give Saudi Arabia “a potent source of leverage to extract future concessions from Washington, including new security guarantees, by threatening to weaponize its program unless the United States promises enhanced military protection.”

US firms could be winners in expected deal

Rep. Brad Sherman, a California Democrat, predicted the deal would benefit U.S. nuclear giant Westinghouse, which builds the large light-water reactors Saudi Arabia is seeking.

The Trump administration said last month it is providing $17.5 billion in loans to speed development of 10 new large nuclear reactors designed by Westinghouse to meet skyrocketing power demand from massive data centers. The new reactors could use the same design, Westinghouse’s AP1000, in the planned Saudi deal.

Sherman said the U.S. military is “bombing Iran because they insist upon enriching and reprocessing” nuclear material.

Now it appears that U.S. officials “are entering into an agreement with Saudi Arabia, giving them the green light to reprocess and to enrich, and the only difference I see here is that Westinghouse stands to make an awful lot of money on this deal, whereas the Iranians were not enriching American companies,” Sherman said at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing Wednesday.

___

Price reported from Manila, Philippines. Associated Press writers Danica Kirka in London and Will Weissert contributed to this report.

The Dictatorship

Trump speaks on behalf of fallen U.S. troops in brazenly self-serving display

Published

1 day ago

July 23, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Trump speaks on behalf of fallen U.S. troops in brazenly self-serving display

When it comes to U.S. service members who have made the ultimate sacrifice during the Iran war, Donald Trump has struggled to know what to say — and how to say it.

In early March, for example, the day after he launched combat operations, the president posted a prerecorded video to social media in which he tried to comment on the deaths of U.S. troops. “Sadly, there will likely be more,” Trump said. Appearing to break from the text on his teleprompter, he added“Before it ends, that’s the way it is.”

A few days later, Time magazine asked the president whether Americans should be worried about possible retaliatory attacks from Iran. “I guess,” Trump replied. By the end of the first week of the war, the president had attended the dignified transfer of six fallen U.S. service members as they were returned home, but he defied American tradition and wore a baseball cap as caskets were carried from the plane.

The image that came into focus was a leader who appeared to be approaching his responsibilities with an unmistakable mix of disrespect and a blasé attitude about developments that he should have taken with a sobriety that he just couldn’t muster.

This week, as the U.S. death toll reached 18, the Republican appeared to use his social media platform to suggest that the total number of fatalities wasn’t that bad because other modern wars were even deadlier. On Wednesday morning, he again traveled to Dover Air Force Base to attend another dignified transfer (he didn’t wear a hat this time), but before departing for the event, the president spent a couple of minutes speaking to the press.

“We’re going to Dover … to honor our heroes, and they are indeed great heroes, actually,” Trump said. Referring to the troops who were killed, he added, “They said, and all of them said very strongly, ‘We can’t let, we cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon.’”

There’s obviously nothing wrong with honoring fallen troops, and if the president wanted to say that their sacrifice was not in vain, it wouldn’t have been controversial in the slightest.

But Trump went far further, claiming that the soldiers who were killed abroad had somehow expressed personal support for the war he launched and endorsed his dubious rationale for the conflict.

As a piece in The New Republic summarized“For Trump to claim that soldiers who are no longer alive were in full agreement with his war is astounding and insulting to their memories. Trump has no idea how the fallen soldiers felt about the war or if they agreed with it, and the opinions of U.S. troops are as diverse as those of any other group of Americans. The soldiers honored in Dover Wednesday were simply doing their duty and following orders.”

A New York Times report added that Trump “did not say how he knew the fallen soldiers’ views, but he decided to speak for them at a perilous political moment.”

It’s a simple rule: Presidents shouldn’t put words in the mouths of fallen soldiers, especially ones they did not know. It’s common sense and common decency that Trump continues to lack.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”