A deal on Ukraine minerals: but what’s in the small print?
26:28 Share

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK.

Toyota is the best resale value brand for 2025, according to kellybluebookskbb.com. And with a wide range of dependable vehicles for any lifestyle, you can get everything you need in a vehicle today while investing in tomorrow. So choose Toyota and choose value. Shop by at toyota.com for great deals and more. Vehicles projected resale value is specific to the 2025 model year. For more information, visit kellybluebookskbb.com. Kelly Blue Book is a registered trademark of Kelly Blue Book Co. Inc.

Toyota, let's go places.

Lowe's helps refresh your garden in time for Mother's Day. Right now, get five bags of 1 1⁄2 cubic foot Scott's NatureScapes mulch for just $10. Plus, select 1 1⁄2 gallon annuals hanging baskets make the perfect gift. Now two for only $15. The best garden starts with great deals. Lowe's. We help. You save. Valid through 5-7. Selection varies by location. While supplies last, discount taking the time of purchase.

Hello and welcome to World Business Report from the BBC World Service. I'm David Harper and coming up on this edition, in just a moment we'll unpick some of the detail behind a deal to exploit mineral resources in Ukraine. A state-backed blog in China suggests that the US might have floated the idea of talks on trade tariffs and we're also in Colombia where support for small businesses could help to keep the peace.

I'm just heading out of town now to visit a beekeeping project in the hills above the city. But this is no ordinary project. First of all, all of the people working on it are women. And secondly, they're all former members of the FARC.

More on that to come in just a moment. First of all, though, it's been a bit of a rough ride, but today we've heard that a deal has been signed between Kiev and Washington. We secured a historic agreement to establish the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund. This is a first-of-its-kind economic partnership for the reconstruction and long-term economic success of

of Ukraine that both the United States - that the United States will greatly benefit from. This partnership represents the United States taking an economic stake in securing a free, peaceful, and sovereign future for Ukraine. This partnership establishes a fund that will receive 50 percent of royalties, license fees, and other similar payments from natural resource projects in Ukraine.

Caroline Levitt, the White House press secretary, speaking at a press conference in the last couple of hours. Now, for Kiev, the deal is seen as essential to ensure its access to future US military aid, although there is no specific security guarantee being offered at this stage. Lisa Yasko is a member of parliament from Ukraine's governing Servant of the People party, and speaking to the BBC, she described the deal as fair.

There are good parts in it, which includes that we are not giving up anything from Ukraine. We don't grant anyone exclusive rights to Ukrainian minerals. But that's a fair deal where the United States are actually investing in the reconstruction fund and they will have 50/50 access to the mineral deals.

There are more interesting parts in it, as for instance, this revenues will not be taxed in Ukraine or United States. Well, I'm joined live by Elena Pavlenko, the president and co-founder of the Ukrainian think tank Dixie Group. Thank you very much for being with us here on World Business Report.

We should mention as well that this deal has changed quite a bit from what was originally suggested. For example, this is no longer, despite what we've heard from President Trump in the past, about Ukraine paying back the US for military support.

Good afternoon. Yes, that is correct. According to this new version, which was published already by Ukrainian government, Ukraine should not pay for the support which was already provided. But the military aid which will be provided after this agreement is signed will be considered as a contribution to this fund. I was going to say there's no specific security guarantee being offered here, but we are talking about military aid for Ukraine.

No, there are no specific guarantees there. There is only what's mentioned there that the US will provide military assistance to Ukraine and it will be the contribution to the investment fund, either in money or as a military support. Let's talk about this investment fund then. What in practice could investment in the rebuilding mean in Ukraine?

I would say that this is a much better version that we saw before, which was leaked a few weeks ago. That's definitely better for Ukraine, but it still has a lot of questions, which should be clarified is the so-called limited partnership agreement, the next version, more detailed version of this deal.

For example, what is the general partner, which is described in this version of the deal, but it's not mentioned, but it is not explained what it is. So we should understand what the general partner, how it will be different from all other partners where Ukraine is just a partner.

And for example, what is the agency of the United States backed by the full face by the United States? So, again, absolutely not clear. Let's, Elena, thank you. Let's bring in Willis Thomas now, who is a mining expert at CRU in London, who's also with us. Thank you very much for joining us. We're talking a lot about exploiting minerals, oil and gas in Ukraine. Do we know how much there is to exploit there?

Thank you so much for having me. We don't know exactly because we certainly are at a very exploratory stage for many of the deposits that are in Ukraine. But in terms of spread of the critical minerals listed by the European Union, which are 34 in total, Ukraine has known deposits of 22 of these, including things like rare earths, titanium, lithium, and many other niche materials that are

all in greater demand because of the energy transition, not only today, but in the years to 2050.

So while a mine takes quite a long time to develop, anywhere between six and 12 years usually, there's a long timeline of need in the global economy for a lot of these minerals. So it is important from that perspective, and there are a vast number of them in Ukraine. I think they are probably underexplored as compared to traditional mining jurisdictions like Canada or Australia. So there may be more as exploration continues and advances. Wow.

What will be critical here is specifically where some of these minerals are. And looking at some of the maps and details that I've been given here, some of these will be in areas where there is strong conflict with Russia at the moment. How much is the actual practicalities of this deal going to depend on a peace deal and safe access to the areas they need to get to?

That's a great question. Mining happens in regions all across the world, some of which are stable and some of which are not. And mining continues even when there's instability. But that certainly raises costs and means that production is likely to be more variable.

So I think in terms of security, that will be a major point into allowing significant exploitation of the mineral resources there, not only in the areas that are maybe controlled by different parties, but even in the areas controlled by Ukraine. You know, having stability both on the Black Sea and on the land will certainly benefit investment, will certainly keep costs in check, and will allow for greater exploitation and exploration around the country.

We should also say this is set against the background of some other areas, particularly China, being a little, shall we say, more difficult for the US to get their hands on some of these rare earth minerals.

Certainly. And that's more so at the processing stage, which this deal does not solve. China is the dominant player across mineral processing for a number of critical minerals that we use every day in our phones or our electric vehicles. So this deal is not going to solve that, but it certainly will increase the overall supply at the mine level, which is probably the hardest place to bring on new capacity.

Plants can come online in a few years, two, three maybe in a rush. And we've certainly seen that in a number of different industries, but including mineral refining.

But it's really the deposits and opening those up that is a crucial bottleneck to supplying the energy transition with the metals needed. And coming back to Elena for a moment, we talked about the use of this fund to help with the rebuilding of Ukraine. But in terms of Ukrainian industry, this is another plus for this deal, isn't it? An increase in the mining industry like this is going to bring jobs, is going to bring the development of businesses. Yes.

Definitely. Every investment will help Ukraine with its recovery, green recovery, fast recovery. What would be good to have in this next level of the agreement is to have a better understanding whether the critical minerals which will be extracted will be just exported from Ukraine or we will have a chance to build a more value chain, to have a possibility to process

them, then to do some manufacturing. That will bring much more jobs and economic stability for Ukraine. So potentially, I mean, there is a reasonable tech industry in Ukraine already, but potentially a boost for those sort of industries, things like battery production, other tech applications for Ukraine.

Absolutely. Actually, Ukraine can help with the production of so-called or manufacturing so-called net zero technologies, which EU defined as critical for itself, which are batteries, ground source heat pumps, solar panels and other even grids. Actually, Ukraine will need the grid manufacturing in Ukraine for itself, but also for the EU. Elena and Willis, thank you very much for joining us. Just looking at some of the details.

of that deal that we've heard of between Washington and Kiev over the exploitation of some of Ukraine's natural minerals. Well, staying slightly in the US for a moment and the rollercoaster ride that is Donald Trump's tariffs on trade continues with seemingly a new twist to this saga pretty much every day. Today, we've seen a Chinese state-backed blog site reporting that the United States has asked China to engage in trade talks

aimed at bringing down the two countries' huge reciprocal tariffs. Yu Yuntan Tian, a digital outlet linked to Chinese state television, said that Washington was proactively reaching out to Beijing through multiple channels. President Trump has been pretty dismissive about concerns that the lack of Chinese imports may lead to stocks for some goods getting low on the shelves. Here he is speaking at the White House on Wednesday.

Much of it we don't need. You know, somebody said, oh, the shelves are going to be open. Well, maybe the children will have $2 instead of $30, you know.

And maybe the $2 will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally. It's interesting to note that previously President Trump has said that China must initiate talks if it wanted to negotiate down the 145% tariffs imposed on Chinese imports to the US. He has said that he's spoken to China's leader, Xi Jinping, but Beijing has repeatedly said that no trade talks are taking place. China does, though, remain bullish. This is the reaction from a toy seller at China's biggest wholesale market in Yiwu.

I hear there are lots of protests in the US. Most of their products came from here. Do you think they need us? Of course they do. So let's have a little look at what we have seen here. I asked the BBC's China media analyst, Kerry Allen, a little bit more about this blog where we've seen this report. It's affiliated with the official China media group, and that is the top media group in China. It directly owns and regulates

broadcast media like CCTV, so China's national broadcasters. So it's an official platform. So any messaging from there is seen by the government directly, it's seen by top people, and it's seen as very important and worth paying attention to.

So presumably this is a slightly, shall we say, back doorway of communicating to other people around the world. This is not a Chinese minister saying this. This is not official government communication. But presumably in places like Washington, it will be seen almost as if it was.

Absolutely, yes. But one thing I should stress is that Chinese media is saying, despite this platform saying that the US is actively engaging with China, media are very strongly stressing that this is counter to messaging that's come from official bodies in recent days. And as part of this, we've seen quite a lot of messages online, including one I've got a clip of here, saying quite strongly the opposite, saying that the strategy needs to be to stand up to America. This is a little bit of what we've seen.

No matter how hard the wind blows, no matter how clouds rage, the darker the night, the brighter the stars shine. Someone has to step forward, torch in hand, to shatter the fog and illuminate the path ahead. When every nation stands tall, the world will break through the walls of hegemony. For China, for the world.

We must rise and fight on. Quite an interesting, quite an interesting and well-produced message. And also interestingly available in both English and Chinese online. When you're looking, because I mean, this is your job to look across the Chinese media landscape. When you're looking at all this and you see mixed messages like this, how do you sift through to the real message?

Well, there is the domestic message and the international message when it comes to China. So one thing I would stress is that this clip was shared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It's been shared on international platforms, but it's also been really heavily shared by state media within China. And there is a view from Chinese people, if they're accessing social media, if they're watching TV or reading newspapers, that

They are getting the impression that China is standing up to the US and is not backing down, is not having talks with the US whatsoever. The South China Morning Post has said that it perceives that China is waiting to see how other countries are going to respond to the tariffs after the 90-day suspension. It very much has the feeling that China's in a stronger position at the moment. This is both independent and state media saying this.

And it's a waiting game. It's waiting to see how other countries are going to respond. At the moment, China is able to carve out relations with other regions like the EU. And it's been focusing in recent days on state visits to neighbour nations. But it's saying that China is in a strong position at the moment. So there's no reason that it would want to deal with the U.S.

The BBC's China media analyst Kerry Allen speaking to me a little earlier. I'm joined for World Business Report today by Emma Wall, who's head of platform investments at Hargreaves Lansdowne. Emma, thank you very much for being with us. We heard a clip at the top of the programme from that press conference in Washington earlier with Caroline Levitt saying that countries were all desperate to speak to the US for a trade deal. We heard elsewhere in the press conference. This is a message that's a little bit of dodds with China's suggestion that the US wants to talk to them.

It is indeed. And this is the crux of the matter because no matter the 90-day reprieve on all other tariffs which have had a beneficial impact on global stock markets, if the world's two largest global

Global superpowers can't do a deal. It will have broader ramifications and that risk of recession in the US and indeed across the world becomes a heightened risk. It's interesting how these little messages are playing out with reports on government-backed blogs and comments here and everywhere. There's a lot of behind-the-scenes kind of overt talking going on.

There is. And it's talking that the market listens to. I mean, the stock market is very sensitive at the moment, actually. I say the stock market, but both the equity market and the bond market are very sensitive to rumors, to social media posts, to hints.

And that causes a lot of volatility in the market. But until we get a deal, we can't expect that volatility to go away. Here's something that got us very interested in the office here just a little while ago. The idea that figures have dropped somewhat for McDonald's by quite a significant amount. The biggest drop, it says here, since the height of the COVID pandemic in the US. And the suggestion that this might be the first indication of changes in spending habits.

Yeah, so McDonald's results are quite often the canary in the coal mine when it comes to recession indicators because they are a low cost item. They're seen as one of the things that people or consumers cut last rather. So big ticket items you expect to see trail off long before recession hits, things like luxury items.

But things like McDonald's, which many people consider a consumer staple, if sales start to hurt in McDonald's, that can be a leading indicator of recession. And it goes hand in hand with actually the jobs figures that we've seen come out of the US today, an uptick in claims for the jobless.

And actually, those two taken together are indicators that perhaps recession is on the horizon. The consensus among economists is still pricing in between 40 and 60 percent chance of recession in the US. So it's not guaranteed, but it's certainly not gone away either. We shouldn't be too downbeat about this because there are other factors in the markets which are keeping things afloat somewhat, particularly some of the tech sector.

It's true. If you look at some of the big headlines today, actually growth forecast of Japan being significantly downgraded, bad figures out of McDonald's, bad jobs figures. And then you look at the stock market, at least the US stock market, you'd think, actually, how is that translating? And that is because we've also had some really strong data coming out of the tech stocks, as you mentioned, and that has helped lift

The US stock market to just shy of 100 points lower, actually, of where it was before Liberation Day. So you remember Liberation Day wiped $9.5 trillion off global stock markets in 48 hours of trading. Well, actually, we're almost back to pre-Liberation Day levels. So it just goes to show that the macro can have big impact.

on the stock market, but so too can the micro, the bottom up, the stocks. Very interesting. And we'll be talking about Apple and Meta in particular a little later on. Emma, thank you very much for being with us. We'll speak to you again in just a couple of moments. You are with World Business Report from the BBC World Service.

Toyota is the best resale value brand for 2025, according to kellybluebookskbb.com. And with a wide range of dependable vehicles for any lifestyle, you can get everything you need in a vehicle today while investing in tomorrow. So choose Toyota and choose value. Shop buyatoyota.com for great deals and more. Vehicles projected resale value is specific to the 2025 model year. For more information, visit kellybluebookskbb.com. Kelly Blue Book is a registered trademark of Kelly Blue Book Co. Inc.

Toyota, let's go places. At Amica Insurance, we know it's more than a life policy. It's about the promise and the responsibility that comes with being a new parent. Being there day and night and building a plan for tomorrow, today. For the ones you'll always look out for, trust Amica Life Insurance. Amica. Empathy is our best policy.

Now, more than eight years have passed since the Colombian government signed a peace agreement with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the FARC, the largest left-wing guerrilla group in Latin America. Thousands of FARC fighters came out of the jungle and mountain hideouts and handed in their weapons and returned to civilian life. The state has tried to help them to reintegrate into the workforce, find jobs and start businesses. So how has that process gone? Our reporter Gideon Long has been to Colombia for BBC Business Daily to find out.

It's early morning here in Colombia's third largest city, Cali, in the southwest of the country. We're just heading out of town now to visit a beekeeping project in the hills above the city. But this is no ordinary project. First of all, all of the people working on it are women. And secondly, they're all former members of the FARC.

I'm here to meet four of the women. As we pull up, I can't help noticing they brought security guys along with them too. We drive on a little further and then leave our cars by the side of a country road and we start walking into a thick forest. We've walked a couple of hundred metres off the road now and we've come to a little clearing where there's about 20 beehives.

I speak to one of the women, Ana Milena Cortes. She was 19 when she joined the FARC. She was a nurse and in her part of Colombia, the guerrillas were in fierce battles with another rebel group, the ELN. Ana Milena treated wounded FARC fighters and spent the next nine years with the guerrillas. But in 2014, the Colombian army caught up with her unit and she was detained. She

She spent three years in jail before being released in 2017 as part of the peace process. When I left jail, I went to the government demobilization camp, but I didn't want to be there, so I went home. I wanted to see my family. It had been so, so long. I met the man who's now my husband, and we came here to work on a farm. That was when I first heard that the government could help us set up our own projects.

They held a meeting and this cooperative grew out of that meeting. The women who run this project have dressed me up in a full beekeeper's outfit, complete with a face visor, covered from head to toe. And we're going to go in and look at the main beehives now.

The beehive consists of around 10 panels which can be lifted out of the hive and Milena is just lifting them out now and each time she does thousands of bees just come rushing out absolutely swarming around us. They're covering my recorder and microphone.

This beekeeping cooperative is one of thousands of projects that former members of the FARC have set up, with help from the state, since the peace deal was signed. But they are controversial and there's been a backlash against the former guerrillas. The FARC killed thousands of people during its war with the state. It kidnapped and extorted thousands more. It forcibly recruited children and was heavily involved in the drugs trade.

Many Colombians question why the state is helping former rebels set up businesses, but it isn't subsidising other ordinary Colombians who never took up arms to do the same.

Ximena Ochoa has a long history with the FARC. The group kidnapped her mother in 1990 and only released her for a ransom. For years, Ximena's family, cattle ranchers in rural Colombia, were harassed by the group. These days, Ximena is the president of an association of victims of Colombia's left-wing rebels. Ximena, part of the peace agreement that was signed in 2016...

involved the state helping and financing projects run by former members of the FARC. What's your view on those projects? Those projects suffer from a problem which comes from a lack of understanding of the FARC. The government of Juan Manuel Santos saw the FARC as a monolithic organisation. It thought the leaders had the same objectives as the rank-and-file members. That was a big mistake.

I don't know where the idea comes from, that someone who is a criminal ceases to be a criminal just because they sign a piece of paper.

So you're talking there about the senior members of the FARC, but do you accept that there were also junior members of the FARC who did need help to reintegrate themselves into civilian life? They've had more economic help than the victims because the state gave them a salary and it gave them money to start businesses. The vast majority of the victims of the FARC in Colombia haven't been given that. The

The victimisers have had it easier than the victims. Jimena Ochoas, finishing that from Gideon Long, and you can hear Gideon's full report on the reintegration of FARC guerrillas. Just search for Business Daily wherever you get your BBC podcasts.

Let's return, as we promised, to some of the news regarding some of the tech giants, including Meta, who's warning that its European users may have a worse experience using their services than their American counterparts. They're blaming a decision by the European Commission over Meta's so-called consent or pay model. This is where people have the choice of allowing the company to use data gathered by Facebook and Instagram users or alternatively paying a monthly fee subscription if they want to keep their data.

private. The European Commission said that the model didn't comply with their Digital Markets Act and fined Meta almost $230 million. We can get more detail on this from the BBC's tech correspondent, Lily Jamali. The consent or pay model leaves users to choose between paying for a monthly subscription or consenting to being tracked using their data.

Last week, the European Commission ruled that this approach that was suggested by Meta violates the Digital Markets Act, which aims to promote competition by regulating the big tech gatekeepers, which includes Meta. Meta, of course, runs the social media network Facebook, as well as the photo-sharing app Instagram and the messaging service

Now, on Wednesday, Meta told investors and analysts that it expects that this decision by the European Commission will likely prompt it to make changes that could make the user experience for European users worse and could also have a materially adverse impact on its own business. One analyst I've been speaking to today said he thinks that Meta is trying to turn the tide of public opinion

opinion in Europe among European users so that they push back against the regulatory approach by regulators in Europe. Lily Jamali there and I'm joined still by Emma Wall, Head of Platform Investments at Hargreaves Lansdowne. This is very interesting because this is showing companies trying to adapt to different regulatory frameworks but at the end of the day something universal like the internet having a different experience in different parts of the world is never going to be easy.

No, it's not. And in fact, we're talking about two regimes there, the EU and the US. There's also a third because the UK, where we're based, is also under a different regulatory regime since leaving the EU. So what's really interesting there is about the service element of it. So although there might be different regulatory requirements, actually that pushback from the end user of taking a suboptimal service will ultimately decide whether

You know, because, of course, if clients walk and money talks, then they'll have to adjust. Absolutely. And Meta having to having to adjust some of their platforms to meet the changing markets as well. We've also heard from Apple, of course, that they have been caught up in something similar, but more along the anti-competition legislation.

They have. And we're looking ahead to Apple because Apple is going to have their results tonight. And it's all about guidance and tariffs. We've opened the program with tariffs. And most of the results actually from the big tech giants have talked about tariffs. Apple is one that's most affected. It's less of an AI play and more of a hardware and software play. And its hardware is affected by the tariffs. What will be really interesting with Apple is,

is whether actually they've seen iPhone sales bounce on expectation of more expensive iPhones in the future. So iPhone guidance has been flat going into this quarter, but that was before the tariff announcements. And so people might have been bringing forward

the decision to buy a new iPhone before they expect prices to rise. So that'll be really interesting to watch. Something we'll have to watch. And I'm sure we'll be talking about those Apple results here on the BBC World Service with World Business Reports and Business Matters a little later on. Some news just coming in. I want to bring you before we go. Reports from the US say that the National Security Advisor, Michael Waltz, is leaving his post. Mr. Waltz, of course, been embroiled in the controversy over classified information being shared on a messaging group to which a journalist was added. That's it, though, for World Business Report.

Toyota is the best resale value brand for 2025, according to kellybluebookskbb.com. And with a wide range of dependable vehicles for any lifestyle, you can get everything you need in a vehicle today while investing in tomorrow. So choose Toyota and choose value. Shop via toyota.com for great deals and more. Vehicles projected resale value is specific to the 2025 model year. For more information, visit kellybluebookskbb.com. Kelly Blue Book is a registered trademark of Kelly Blue Book Co. Inc.

Toyota, let's go places.