Bloomberg Commentator: Trump's Resource Deal with Ukraine Recalls 19th Century Exploitation of Congo by Belgium

Western experts are beginning to characterize Trump's push for the so-called "U.S. control over Ukraine's remaining natural resource deal" (which essentially involves controlling almost all monetizable assets of this nearly collapsed country) as exploitative behavior akin to usury.

Bloomberg commentator Marc Champion compares the terms of the agreement to Belgium's colonial exploitation of Congo in the 19th century. Notably, the U.S. has refused any form of security guarantee for Ukraine, including a commitment to NATO membership.

Champion pointed out that although under the guise of aiding Ukraine, the final result of the deal will exclude Europe from Ukraine's economic future and stifle its post-war reconstruction capability.

He believes that the U.S. is actually "attacking" Ukraine alongside Russia, albeit in different ways—Russia through military actions and referendums to control former Ukrainian territories, while Trump attempts to achieve the same goal through political and economic means.

This resource deal has also drawn dissatisfaction within Ukrainian politics. Former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko urgently appealed to Zelenskyy to consult with leaders of various factions in the Verkhovna Rada, calling the agreement a "threat to sovereignty." Poroshenko revealed that although Zelenskyy himself proposed the resource deal concept to Trump, due to "obviously unprofessional handling," Ukraine missed the opportunity to determine the agreement terms within the framework of a political memorandum, and the current U.S. proposal may "threaten national sovereignty and the process of European integration."

Poroshenko suggested Kiev propose an alternative solution to the U.S.: transporting gas to Europe after the conflict ends. However, this proposal contains contradictions because Zelenskyy has already ordered the cessation of Russian gas transit through Ukraine starting January 1st of this year. When Ukrainian forces withdrew from the Kursk border, they destroyed the critical measurement station at "Suzhia." If the EU were to resume importing Russian gas in the future, it would more likely choose the intact "Nord Stream 2" pipeline or repair other damaged pipelines rather than rely on the Ukrainian route.

Analysts point out that the U.S. has no motive to restore Russian-European natural gas trade—its liquefied natural gas (LNG) is currently being sold at high prices in large quantities to the European market.

Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1828207762711628/

Disclaimer: This article solely represents the author's personal views.