Russian invasion of Ukraine

Not sure what you class as large, but according to this, Germany France and Poland do. Maybe other analysis says different.

It's no secret that many unrelated costs are being cheated into the pot to somehow achieve 2% GDP - but today isn't the time anymore for games.

The point is to calculate what we NEED to defend Ukraine and Europe in terms of man power, weapons and logistics. Whatever %age comes out bottom line. As simple as that, and I feel it's being understood right now.

Every country has to discuss what and how they can achieve on a financial and political scale. And then get to work ffs.
 
Poland was referenced in my original post as a country that spends sufficiently. France and Germany might meet 2% this year, we're still working with estimates, but if they do they will barely clear that bar, which was set in 2014 and is probably too low for the current situation.

The fact that Poland and Estonia are willing to spend so much while rich countries like Germany and France maybe meet the guidelines, and countries like Italy Canada and Belgium are nowhere near the guidelines, illustrates the problem. Everybody needs to pull their weight.

Oh, I fully agree. "Peace dividend" is over, however hard it is to accept that.
 

US president demands higher share of Ukrainian GDP than reparations imposed on Germany at Versailles​


Donald Trump's demand for a $500bn (£400bn) "payback" from Ukraine goes far beyond US control over the country's critical minerals. It covers everything from ports and infrastructure to oil and gas, and the larger resource base of the country.

The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky's office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.

The Telegraph has obtained a draft of the pre-decisional contract, marked "Privileged & Confidential' and dated Feb 7 2025. It states that the US and Ukraine should form a joint investment fund to ensure that "hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine".

The agreement covers the "economic value associated with resources of Ukraine", including "mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)", leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. "This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles," it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of "all new licences issued to third parties" for the future monetisation of resources. There will be "a lien on such revenues" in favour of the US. "That clause means 'pay us first, and then feed your children'," said one source close to the negotiations.

It states that "for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals". Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine's commodity and resource economy. The fund "shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions" of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.

President Zelensky himself proposed the idea of giving the US a direct stake in Ukraine's rare earth elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September, hoping to smooth the way for continued arms deliveries.

He calculated that it would lead to US companies setting operations on the ground, creating a political tripwire that would deter Vladimir Putin from attacking again.

Some mineral basins are near the front line in eastern Ukraine, or in Russian-occupied areas. He has played up the dangers of letting strategic reserves of titanium, tungsten, uranium, graphite and rare earths fall into Russian hands. "If we are talking about a deal, then let's do a deal, we are only for it," he said.
He probably did not expect to be confronted with terms normally imposed on aggressor states defeated in war. They are worse than the financial penalties imposed on Germany and Japan after their defeat in 1945. Both countries were ultimately net recipients of funds from the victorious allies.
 
I always thought trump would be a disruptor and he is right about Europe stepping up. Long term developing our own weapons will hurt the USA and will diminish their influence but his attempt to extort 50% of Ukraines mineral reserves in perpetuity is one of the most disgusting things I have ever heard a politician say. I hope and pray that Zelenskyy tells him to fuck tight off and that we can support them long enough for Russia to collapse
 
I see European Leaders can't come up with what is needed in a 4 hour session.
Is it a wait and see approach or just more dithering?
Sadly I'm not optimistic.
 
Last edited:

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top