Volodymyr Zelenskyy has spoken today about Donald Trump’s plan to end the war and a Ukraine-US deal on rare minerals. Earlier, Russia’s foreign minister dismissed the idea of peacekeepers after any ceasefire as “empty talk”. Watch a Q&A with military analyst Michael Clarke below.
Wednesday 26 February 2025 15:46, UK
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
There is a deep frustration in Washington after Volodymyr Zelenskyy suggested security guarantees remain critical to any deal with the US, our correspondent David Blevins has said.
“Yesterday, they [the US] thought they had an agreement in principle,” he told our presenter Jayne Secker.
While Zelenskyy appears to be suggesting that security guarantees remain critical to any deal, Blevins said there are big questions over whether a meeting with Trump will actually take place on Friday.
It follows comments from a White House official, who said an invitation to meet Trump doesn’t make sense if a deal has not been finalised.
“I suppose this does not create the ideal context for the arrival of Sir Keir Starmer,” Blevins added.
“He arrives in Washington later today for his first meeting with the president, which he hoped would have been taking place against the backdrop of this deal done.”
We’ve heard from Volodymyr Zelenskyy this afternoon, who said Ukraine is preparing to sign a “framework agreement” with the US that would pave the way for the creation of an investment fund (see our 1.26pm post).
But what does any of that mean, really?
Donald Trump wants a chunk of Ukraine’s natural resources, as our security and defence editor Deborah Haynes explains in the video below. That means metals like titanium.
In return, Ukraine wants guarantees of protection from the US. As we’ve been reporting, it seems Zelenskyy is determined to get these – and is not yet convinced the “framework agreement” provides them.
It is also understood the agreed investment fund would be used to rebuild Ukraine, as well as develop its vast mineral wealth and other natural resources.
The framework agreement between Ukraine and the US feels more like a “confidence building measure”, our security and defence editor Deborah Haynes has said.
Speaking to our presenter Jayne Secker, Haynes explained that while the agreement doesn’t go into specific details, it instead sets out a pathway.
She said Ukraine and the US are after “two very different things and they really strongly want them”.
Trump has been saying he thinks Zelenskyy has “ripped off” America, Haynes explains, while Ukraine “desperately needs Trump and his White House to be batting in its corner”.
“It is an important first step, but it is only a first step,” Haynes added.
“Given the hostile language we’ve heard from Trump… there is a difficult path for the Ukrainian president to navigate.
“If he does go to Washington on Friday, then he will at least have that face-to-face meeting with Trump, which Zelenskyy has said is so important that they have before the US president potentially meets with Vladimir Putin.”
Before our Q&A, we brought you the latest from Volodymyr Zelenksyy, who was speaking at a news conference.
Ukraine’s president addressed the minerals deal with the US, and said plans to meet Donald Trump in Washington on Friday have not yet been confirmed.
“This is an economic agreement, but I really wanted to have an understanding that we have an equal vision of our future security guarantees, even in the framework agreement,” he said.
Zelenskyy explained he “really wanted at least one sentence” that mentions Ukraine’s security guarantees, and adds that government officials have told him it is there.
“It is important that there is this mention, I am yet to read the detail of it,” he said.
“I understand my government colleagues suggest that this is to be signed by ministers, and I understand this is a shared understanding of both parties interests and the more focussed on the procedure of the signing procedure.”
That’s it for our live Q&A on the Ukraine war with security and defence analyst Michael Clarke – thanks for following along.
Clarke answered lots of your questions on the war in Ukraine, from what a border between Ukraine and Russia could look like to whether the war-torn country would have to agree to a US-Russia deal.
Scroll down to read Clarke’s answers on:
You can rewatch it in full by clicking the below YouTube link, or scroll back to read through some of his answers.
“Sadly, I think we’re on the edge of a historic betrayal of historic proportions,” says Michael Clarke.
“It looks as if Ukraine is going to lose close to 20% of its territory and the Western world is going to lose 100% of its political credibility.
“The Western world as a construct is dead. It’s been sliding fast the last few years, but in recent weeks it’s been the final nails in the coffin.”
Clarke adds we’re now living in a world of “new imperialism” with three great imperialist autocrats who all want to enlarge their countries.
“Vladimir Putin has been clear in where he wants to enlarge his country, Xi Jinping has made it very clear he wants to enlarge his country into Taiwan and the South China Sea, and Donald Trump is determined to enlarge his country,” says Clarke.
“He’s pretty serious about taking Greenland and about Panama and Canada.”
Clarke adds Trump’s vision is to bring together the three leaders at a “great conference to settle the world”.
Clarke says Trump, alongside Putin and Xi, cares most about his own country and not Ukrainians, Palestinians, Taiwanese or NATO members.
“We’re living in very dark days, I’m afraid.”
“Firstly, there’s not that many,” Michael Clarke says of the looming mineral deal between the US and Ukraine.
“The point of the deal… is that the US and Ukraine say we’ll develop [the minerals] together,” he says.
He says it doesn’t include any military guarantees, but it effectively offers Ukraine implicit US security protections, as Washington will have a direct economic stake in the game.
He notes that estimates of how much and where these minerals are is all based on the Soviet era.
He also suggests that Volodymyr Zelenskyy didn’t realise who he was selling to.
“He didn’t realise he was dealing with such a predatory leadership,” he says.
Michael Clarke says Ukraine could carry on fighting with what it has.
He says: “If some really hopeless deal is forced on them with Russian sweeteners which reduces their ability to operate as a sovereign state then they might say ‘why should we sign our own death warrant?’
“It’s hard to negotiate with someone who is trying to kill you.
“It is plausible they could keep on going but at some point, Ukraine has got to be brought into this deal and persuaded this is the best offer.”
With the US seemingly no longer willing to act as Europe’s security guarantee under the Trump administration, our next question ponders what this could mean for the continent.
Marlon asks if Europe’s nuclear capability is enough of a deterrent to Russia if it decides to target Europe.
Michael Clarke says it is, pointing to the French and British nuclear capabilities as examples of European nations that could defend the continent if required.
He says if Europe needed to “beef up” its nuclear capabilities, it could expand to having air delivered weapons.
Currently, nuclear weapons in a time of war would be fired via submarines, one of which is capable of delivering 40 warheads.
“We could supplement it with aircraft, like Typhoons or F-35s that are capable of carrying nuclear warheads.”
Russia currently controls the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant – the largest in Europe – and previously held control of the Chernobyl disaster zone.
So are they at risk?
Michael Clarke says both sites are vulnerable.
Ukraine and the West must make sure that proper engineers are able to access any occupied sites “depending on how a peace deal worked out”, Clarke says.
The international nuclear agencies are “very worried” about the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in particular, he says.
Be the first to get Breaking News
Install the Sky News app for free