Russia’s Proposed Deal with the US to End the War in Ukraine

As the Russian invasion of Ukraine enters its fifth year in 2026, with no end in sight despite ongoing U.S. brokered negotiations, Russia has extended a bold economic business deal to the United States.

Valued at an staggering $12-14 trillion over the long term, these proposals aim to entice American companies with preferential access to Russia's vast resources, joint ventures, and market reopenings, all contingent on a peace settlement in Ukraine and the lifting of Western sanctions.

This "business not war" approach, as dubbed in some reports, represents a strategic pivot by President Vladimir Putin to leverage Russia's economic potential amid battlefield stalemates and domestic pressures.

However, the deals raise profound questions about Ukraine's future, potentially sacrificing its territorial integrity, sovereignty, and economic independence for geopolitical expediency.

Russia's proposals, outlined in internal Kremlin memos and public statements, form a comprehensive economic pact designed to restore pre-war ties while expanding U.S. influence in key sectors.

Central to the package is the restarting of energy cooperation, a cornerstone of Russia's economy.

Putin has offered American firms priority in oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects, including offshore and Arctic developments.



This includes recovering prior U.S. investments frozen by sanctions and resuming dollar-based settlements for energy trades, which could reinforce the U.S. dollar's global dominance.

One notable example is a recent agreement between Gentry Beach, a Texas-based investor linked to the Trump family, and a major Russian energy firm for Alaskan natural gas development, hinting at thawing relations despite ongoing restrictions.

Beyond energy, Russia is offering access to critical minerals and raw materials.

Proposals include joint exploration of rare earth deposits, lithium, copper, nickel, platinum, and other resources essential for electronics, renewables, and defense industries, potentially worth up to $15 billion in U.S. investments.

Strikingly, this extends to occupied Ukrainian territories, such as mineral-rich areas in Donbas and Zaporizhzhia, where Russia controls significant reserves.

Aluminum supplies are another key element, Russian firms could deliver up to 2 million tons annually to the U.S. market upon reopening, alongside partnerships in nuclear energy and AI-driven projects.

Additional incentives involve broader reconstruction efforts.

Russia suggests using approximately $300 billion in frozen assets, mostly held in Europe, to fund investments in Ukraine and Russia, with U.S. companies leading the charge.

Putin has even floated committing U.S. frozen Russian assets to the "Board of Peace" and Ukrainian rebuilding, potentially allocating $1 billion initially.

In a geopolitical sweetener, Moscow has hinted at curbing military-tech ties with China in exchange for favorable terms. These offers, pitched by envoys like Kirill Dmitriev, aim to create "commercial guarantors of peace" with U.S. firms gaining exclusive rights in mining, energy, and infrastructure.

For U.S. businesses, the proposals are intriguing.

Sanctions have barred American firms from Russia's lucrative markets since 2022, but many, over 2,300 Western companies, never fully exited, generating $20 billion in Russian tax revenue last year.

Reopening could unlock trillions in deals, bolstering U.S. energy security, reducing reliance on Chinese rare earths, and creating jobs through joint ventures.

The Trump administration's focus on "making America great again" aligns with this, as evidenced by discreet talks involving sanctioned Russians and potential conflicts of interest for figures like envoy Steve Witkoff.

Analysts say Russia's economy, despite running deficits and high inflation, has held up better than expected under sanctions. This comes amid U.S. public opinion shifting toward sustained support for Ukraine, with Congress pushing for asset seizures and tighter sanctions.

If the U.S. accepts, Ukraine stands to lose the most.

Territorial concessions could amount to 20% of its land, including Crimea, full Donbas (even unoccupied parts), and frozen lines in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.

This would strip Ukraine of $12.4 trillion in natural resources, crippling its economy and leaving it landlocked or port-deprived.

Reconstruction, estimated at $800 billion, would rely on U.S. led investments using frozen Russian assets, but with American firms prioritizing profits, potentially making Ukraine economically dependent.

Security wise, the U.S. 28-point plan caps Ukraine's military, blocks NATO membership indefinitely, and offers vague guarantees without U.S. troops leaving it vulnerable to future Russian incursions.

In occupied areas, reports of cultural erasing, child abductions, and killings evoke genocide risks, as warned by experts like Alexander Dugin's writings on “de-Ukrainization".

Public sentiment in Ukraine overwhelmingly rejects Kremlin terms, with only 17% supportive.

President Zelensky has decried the talks as sidelining Ukraine's interests, potentially forcing capitulation under U.S. pressure. Russia's ongoing infrastructure attacks, destroying power grids and making Ukraine “unlivable”, exacerbate this, aiming to break morale and dictate terms.

A deal could pause hostilities but enable Russia to rebuild for future aggression, turning peace into a fragile pause. Europe views the proposals with alarm, fearing a U.S. Russia bilateral deal sidelines them, restarts Russian energy flows, and accelerates de-industrialization.

EU nations have stepped up aid to "Trump-proof" Ukraine, including €90 billion in loans and defense integration. Globally, rewarding Russian aggression could embolden China and undermine sanctions' efficacy, which have already failed to collapse Russia's economy despite inflicting pain.

Russia's maximalist stance, demanding full territorial gains, suggests negotiations are a wedge to divide the West. Russia's offers are rational leverage, exploiting sanctions fatigue and U.S. economic interests, but they mask Putin's unyielding goals, seizing Ukraine.

Feasibility of this deal is low, past talks like Istanbul 2022 collapsed over similar issues, and current drafts are vague, creating loopholes for manipulation.

Ethically, it risks normalizing invasion, abandoning Ukrainian communities, and entrenching fragile peace. For Ukraine, it's a "strategic trap”, short-term relief at the cost of long-term vulnerability.

While Russia's deal promises economic windfalls for the U.S., it could devastate Ukraine, fracturing its territory, economy, and independence.

A true resolution requires addressing root causes without rewarding aggression, and detering future attacks.

Kai Tutor | The Societal News Team 27FEB2026