Nigeria tops Africa in child malnutrition, says UNICEF
The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has raised concern over the alarming rates of child malnutrition in Nigeria, revealing that the country holds the highest number of malnourished children in Africa and ranks second globally. During a press briefing on Monday in Abuja, Nemat Hajeebhoy, UNICEF’s Chief of Nutrition, shared that around 600,000 children across Nigeria are currently suffering from acute malnutrition. Of this number, roughly half are at risk of progressing to severe acute malnutrition—a condition that significantly increases the likelihood of death. “Children with severe acute malnutrition are nine to eleven times more likely to die,” she said. The media session was convened by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) to unveil its 2025 lean season multisectoral response plan for the crisis-hit states of Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe. Also speaking at the briefing, Serigne Loum, Head of Programme at the World Food Programme (WFP), highlighted Nigeria’s food crisis, stating that the country has the highest number of food-insecure people on the continent. These revelations come amid urgent appeals for financial support to combat the escalating food and nutrition emergency in Nigeria’s northeast. OCHA’s Head of Office, Trond Jensen, disclosed that $300 million is required to adequately address the challenges of food insecurity, malnutrition, water and sanitation, health, protection, and logistics during the upcoming lean season. $160 million of the total appeal is needed for immediate interventions – UNICEF Jensen stressed that $160 million of the total appeal is needed for immediate interventions. “This is the bare minimum we need,” he said, adding that the response capacity has been weakened due to reduced funding, particularly from the United States and other key donors. “It’s a paradox that while the number of children in need has doubled, our resources to meet those needs have in some cases been cut in half,” he noted. Jensen said the UN is now only able to target two million people—half the number supported last year—due to the ongoing financial shortfall. He urged both Nigerian authorities and international partners to step up their contributions. The call for assistance follows OCHA’s recent announcement that it would begin scaling back its operations in Nigeria, citing a continued decline in donor funding
British goods hit harder by Trump’s tariff policy than EU exports
Despite Donald Trump’s long-standing hostility toward Brussels, new analysis reveals that British exports are subject to higher effective tariffs in the United States than goods from the European Union. The findings have renewed concerns about the strength and future of the so-called ‘special relationship’ between the UK and the US. According to figures from Capital Economics, documented by the Telegraph, the UK’s average effective tariff rate on exports to the US currently stands at 11.6%, compared to just 9.5% for the EU. That places Britain not only behind the bloc, but also behind countries such as Mexico, Canada, India, Thailand, and Vietnam in terms of trade access to the American market. The disparity stems largely from the composition of UK exports, which include a significant share of items subject to sector-specific levies. While the headline tariff rate introduced by the Trump administration sits at 10% for the UK and 20% for the EU, British goods—particularly steel and automobiles—are hit by additional charges, with some items facing duties as high as 25%. This is a particular blow to Britain’s car manufacturing sector. In 2024 alone, UK carmakers—including Jaguar Land Rover and Aston Martin—exported £9 billion worth of vehicles to the US, making automobiles the UK’s single largest export category to the country. By contrast, a substantial portion of the EU’s exports to the US are made up of pharmaceuticals, which are protected under existing carve-outs and remain tariff-free. Similarly, Vietnam and India benefit from exemptions for electronics, while Canada and Mexico continue to enjoy preferential treatment under the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA). Ironically, the higher burden on UK goods comes despite Trump’s public disdain for the EU, which he has accused of being “formed to screw the United States.” Meanwhile, Trump has publicly praised Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s efforts to advocate for a trade deal, stating after a February meeting that “there’s a good chance of a deal where tariffs wouldn’t be necessary,” and adding that Starmer had “earned whatever the hell they pay him over there.” Yet hopes of a swift trade agreement remain uncertain. Recent reports indicate the Trump administration has downgraded Britain to a “second-order priority”, with nations such as South Korea receiving more immediate attention in trade talks. Speaking on Friday, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said that “all options remain on the table” following the Government’s public consultation on the economic impact of US tariffs. “We are now in a new era for trade and the economy,” Reynolds said, “and that means going further and faster to strengthen the UK’s economy. While we analyse responses, this Government’s priority will be to build on the strength of our relationship with the US and continue talks to find a resolution for UK businesses.” Paul Dans, a former Trump administration official and lead architect of Project 2025—a conservative policy blueprint widely considered to be influencing current White House strategy—also struck an optimistic tone. “President Trump ultimately wants to get to a yes on deals,” he said. “Now is the time for the UK to make a good deal.” Project 2025, drafted by the US-based Heritage Foundation, is a 900-page document recommending sweeping changes to federal policy, including the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education. Many of its authors now serve in Trump’s administration, including trade advisor Peter Navarro. As Britain looks to carve out its future in a reshaped global trade environment, its path with the US—long seen as a natural ally—remains more complicated than ever.
Medical doctor, PhD holder, Honorary doctorate awardee: Who deserves Dr title?
Who should rightly use the title Dr? This question has sparked intense debates in certain quarters. How do we distinguish holders of honorary doctoral degrees from those with academic qualification using titles? A fundamental distinction exists between honorary doctoral degrees and academic qualifications, particularly the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD). Unlike the PhD, which demands rigorous scholarly inquiry, original research, and academic rigour, honorary doctoral degrees symbolise exceptional individual achievements, contributions, and service to society, distinct from academic accomplishments. Honorary doctoral degrees acknowledge non-academic achievements, including exemplary leadership, innovative entrepreneurship, exceptional artistic expression, and humanitarian endeavors. In the United States, these degrees are denoted by “Hon” or “HC” (Honoris Causa) in parentheses, preceding the degree In an interview with Nigerian Tribune, the Deputy Vice Chancellor, (Administration) University of Ibadan, Professor Peter Olapegba stated that medical doctors should not attach the title “Dr” to their names. He noted that there is a craze for titles in Nigeria compared to abroad where medical doctors do not use the “Dr” title. According to him, it is only those that earn a PhD that are called “Dr.” He added that those who are awarded an honorary doctorate degree are not entitled to be called “Dr.” He said: “This is an ongoing controversy. Basically, abroad, for example, in United States of America precisely, medical doctors are not called Dr. “It is only those that earned an academic PhD that are addressed with ‘Dr’ title unlike here in Africa where everyone wants to be referred to using their title. For example, a veterinary doctor will also call himself a doctor, while a person who produces and prescribes herb will call himself doctor, that is ‘agbomola’ which is the Yoruba name for traditional medicine seller. “Funny enough some professions use titles which do not exist. This includes surveyors who address themselves as ‘Surv.’ ‘Pharm’ is use to refer to pharmacists. Townplanners uses the title, ‘Tpl’. So there is a craze for titles. “So for someone who was awarded with a honorary doctorate degree, the person should not use the Dr title. The person should use ‘PhD Honoris causa’ at the back of their name to indicate that they were honoured with PhD by a university. “So they are not supposed to be addressed as Dr. Sadly because there is no regulation about it, everyone uses the title. If it was strictly regulated, such will be put to an end.” Also speaking in an interview with Nigerian Tribune, the Director General, National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Professor Ayo Omotayo, was also of the opinion that a medical doctor should be addressed as a physician and not addressed with the Dr title. According to him, when medical doctors take further courses in the field they are addressed as ‘registrar’ and later ‘consultant’. Read also: Tinubu to launch world’s largest cotton factory in Ogun He, however, argued that a person who has bagged an honorary doctorate degree award can also be addressed with the title “Dr” just as a person who worked to earn PhD from a university. “Ordinarily medical doctors are not to be called doctors. They are basically physicians; that is the more reason you see they are addressed as registrars and later they graduate to be called consultant. “Those who have PhD are the ones to be called a ‘Dr’ and those who bagged honorary titles are also free to be called Dr because they were given in honour of some achievements they might have had that otherwise qualified them to be called Dr, but not truly at the same level with those who worked hard to get the award. But then, society accepts them. Even though they did not go through the academic process, they can be addressed with the title if they have truly contributed in other areas which makes them worthy to be given the title.” Source: Nigerian Tribune
Trump sparks global debate after posting AI photo in Papal attire
In an unexpected turn of political theatre meets religious spectacle, President Donald Trump has once again stirred global headlines—this time by publishing an AI-generated image of himself dressed as the pope. The image, which quickly went viral after appearing on his Truth Social platform, shows the U.S. president in full papal regalia: white robes, a gold crucifix, and a towering mitre, with his right index finger pointed solemnly to the sky. Coming just days before the Vatican’s conclave to elect the successor to the late Pope Francis, the post has reignited questions about Trump’s obsession with power and influence—both secular and spiritual. It also follows comments he made earlier this week that blurred the line between jest and ambition. When asked during a press briefing who he hoped would succeed Pope Francis, Trump replied, “I’d like to be pope. That would be my number one choice.” Although he later added that he had no particular preference, he did single out “a cardinal out of New York” believed to be Timothy Dolan, the Archbishop of New York, calling him “very good.” Trump’s AI papal image was uploaded without a caption but needed none. The symbolism and timing were clear—and polarizing. Read More: Confusion over age may disqualify African cardinal from Papal conclave After Pope Francis’ death, focus turns to cardinals who will elect next pontiff Pope Francis buried at Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome Public and Political Reaction While the post generated amusement among some of Trump’s supporters, critics were quick to denounce it as another instance of the president trivializing sacred traditions for personal spectacle. Melanie D’Arrigo, a former Democratic congressional candidate, reacted sharply: “The guy who broke all Ten Commandments is posting pictures of himself cosplaying as the next pope.”The Republicans Against Trump account went even further, declaring: “Trump just posted a photo of himself as the pope. It’s full-on lunacy at this point.” Even within Republican circles, reactions ranged from cautious amusement to enthusiastic endorsement. Senator Lindsey Graham remarked last week, apparently in jest, that the conclave should “keep an open mind” about Trump as pope, adding that he was “excited” by the prospect. Religious Context and Political Undercurrents The mock papal post comes at a delicate time for the Vatican, as 133 eligible cardinals prepare to gather for the first conclave in two decades following a pope’s death. Pope Francis, who died on April 21, had often stood as a vocal critic of Trump’s policies, particularly on immigration and nationalism. In a 2016 comment that has since resurfaced, Francis told reporters, “Anyone, whoever he is, who only wants to build walls and not bridges is not a Christian.” Trump’s visit to Pope Francis’s funeral last week marked his first official foreign trip since returning to power. His presence at the service, combined with the viral image, has been widely interpreted as part of a broader public relations strategy aimed at reshaping his image among Catholic voters—a group that made up 20 percent of the American electorate in the last election. Exit polls showed that nearly 60 percent of Catholic voters supported the Republican ticket. Blurring Boundaries Between Faith and Power While most observers view Trump’s papal ambitions as satirical, the broader implications raise serious questions about the fusion of politics, digital manipulation, and religious symbolism in modern leadership. In an age of AI-generated imagery and polarizing public figures, the boundaries between parody and propaganda have grown increasingly thin. What remains clear is that President Trump’s unique brand of populism continues to dominate public discourse, even in places few expected it to reach—like the gates of the Vatican. As the conclave prepares to convene on May 7, one thing is certain: while Trump will not be among the cardinals casting ballots under Michelangelo’s frescoes, his image—papal or otherwise—will remain etched in the spectacle surrounding one of the world’s most sacred traditions.
Ugandan judge convicted under UK’s modern slavery act
A high-ranking Ugandan judge who once served on a United Nations criminal tribunal has been sentenced to more than six years in prison by a British court after being found guilty of modern slavery and immigration offenses involving the forced labor of a young Ugandan woman. Lydia Mugambe Ssali, 50, was convicted in March at Oxford Crown Court of conspiring to breach immigration law, facilitating travel with intent to exploit, forcing labor, and conspiring to intimidate a witness. She was sentenced Friday to six years and four months in prison and barred from contacting the victim. Prosecutors said Mugambe used her legal expertise and social status to orchestrate the victim’s illegal entry and then forced her to work without pay as a maid and nanny while Mugambe pursued a doctorate in law at the University of Oxford. A Scheme Involving Diplomatic Abuse The victim arrived in the U.K. on a domestic worker visa, which had been arranged by John Mugerwa, then Deputy High Commissioner of the Ugandan Embassy in London. Authorities said the visa was issued under the guise that the woman would work in Mugerwa’s household — a privilege allowed under diplomatic arrangements. However, evidence presented in court showed Mugerwa acted as a proxy for Mugambe, who did not have the legal authority to sponsor such a visa as she was a student. Prosecutors argued that in return for helping with the visa, Mugambe agreed to assist Mugerwa with an unrelated legal matter in Uganda. The woman’s travel expenses were covered by Mugambe, who picked her up from the airport and immediately put her to work in her home in Kidlington, Oxfordshire. “She was prevented from earning money, from leaving freely, and from contacting anyone for help,” said prosecutor Caroline Haughey KC, who read the victim’s statement in court. The woman described living “in almost constant fear,” aware of Mugambe’s political and legal connections in Uganda. She has since been granted asylum in the United Kingdom, citing a credible fear of persecution if she returns. No Remorse, Says Judge Sentencing Judge Foxton described the case as “very sad,” noting Mugambe’s long career in human rights law, including her service on the UN roster of criminal tribunal judges and the Ugandan High Court. But he said she showed “absolutely no remorse” and attempted to shift blame onto the victim during proceedings. Mugambe resigned her UN post following the investigation. Her defense attorney, Paul Raudnitz KC, described her as having had a “glittering legal career” and noted the vocal public support she received outside the courtroom, where several individuals held signs calling for her acquittal. A Pattern of Abuse Among Elites Mugambe is among several African nationals recently convicted in the United Kingdom under the Modern Slavery Act, a law enacted in 2015 to combat trafficking and exploitation: Ike Ekweremadu, former Nigerian Deputy Senate President, was sentenced in 2023 to over nine years in prison for attempting to traffic a man to the U.K. for organ harvesting on behalf of his ailing daughter. Beatrice Ncube and Trust Chiweshe, a Zimbabwean couple, were sentenced in 2021 for forcing a woman into unpaid labor in their Manchester home, using threats and withholding her passport. Shekiel Sands, a British national with African heritage, was sentenced in 2022 along with his associates for exploiting children and vulnerable adults in a county lines drug trafficking operation. Implications for Global Legal Institutions Mugambe’s case raises difficult questions for international judicial bodies. According to public records, she was appointed to the UN’s judicial roster in May 2023 — three months after Thames Valley Police launched their investigation. Legal experts say her conviction could undermine trust in international institutions that depend on the moral authority of their officials. “She embodied the principles of law and human rights — and then turned them upside down for personal gain,” said one legal scholar familiar with the case, who asked not to be named due to ongoing international legal proceedings. The victim, who remains in protective care, told the court she may never see her family again.
Rivers women walk out on Ibas’ wife, chant ‘we want Simi’
Hundreds of women of Rivers State have staged a walk out on the Wife of the Sole Administrator of the State, Theresa Ibas‘. The ridiculous incident happened on Friday afternoon during an empowerment programme in Port Harcourt, where Ibas’ wife posed as the First Lady of the state. READ ALSO: Fubara seeks reconciliation with Wike in Abuja amid Rivers state emergency The event which was organised at the EUI event center in Government Reserved Area, GRA, Port Harcourt, is said to be an avenue to empower women of the state. The empowerment programme is said to be organised at the instance of the first lady of Nigeria, Sen. Oluremi Tinubu. However, the hundreds of women who were invited for the event arrived the venue peaceful while the event progressed. But, in what appeared to be a well thought plan, the participants at the empowerment Programme staged a walk immediately wife of the Sole Administrator, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas, rtd., mounted the podium to address the women. The women, who were chanting, “We don’t want Ibas’, We want Sim”, pulled out of the hall in drove, abandoning the acclaimed first lady of the state and her entourage.
Lagos BRT driver to die by hanging for killing Bamise
The Lagos State High Court sitting at the Tafawa Balewa Square has on Friday, April 2nd, 2025, sentenced a driver of Lagos Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), Andrew Nice Ominikoron, to death by hanging for killing a 22-year-old fashion designer, Bamise Ayanwola, in 2022. Justice Sherifat Sonaike gave the verdict. “The deceased died from severe cerebral injury and blood forced trauma, and his actions and inactions led to her death. The law established that the person last seen with a deceased bears full responsibility for the death unless he explains how he had no hand in the death. “In his evidence, he admitted he was alone with her in the bus and where her body was dropped and failed to return to the place to help her and ran away to another state without reporting the case,” the Judge said. Bamise, the last child of her parents, was abducted after boarding a BRT in Lagos, Nigeria and found dead 9 days later. The Background story of Bamise It would be recalled that on February 26, 2022, after exiting work at Ajah area of Lagos state, Bamise boarded a BRT at Chevron axis going to Oshodi around 7:30 pm to go to visit her elder brother’s family to spend the weekend. However, after boarding the bus, the driver flirted with her and told her to sit at the back. She was the only passenger in the bus while the interior was dark. She also observed that at no fewer than two other male passengers entered the bus afterwards. The driver refused to pick up more passengers while there were no CCTV cameras in the bus. Upon her being observant, Bamise contacted a friend by sending voice notes, video recordings of the bus interior with the bus plate number identifier to her friend on WhatsApp, disclosing her concerns. Her friend urged her to alight as soon as possible at the next bus stop. Unfortunately, after further attempts by her friends and relatives to contact her via phone calls were unsuccessful. Before this, one of her last recorded conversations with her friend was “…..Please, pray for me.” After several failed attempts to communicate via her phone, the last known sound heard after a caller picked up her phone revealed her struggling with an unidentified man. The following day, she was reported missing. On March 7, 2022, her lifeless body was discovered naked near the Carter Bridge on Lagos Island. An eyewitness stated that Bamise was still alive after she was thrown off the BRT bus, but she couldn’t be treated or rushed to the hospital before she died.
Nigerian nurse based in UK found dead after ‘missing’
A wave of sorrow has swept through the nursing communities in both the UK and Nigeria following the tragic death of Nnena Miriam, a Nigerian nurse based in Leeds. Her body was discovered in her apartment after friends and colleagues grew concerned over her sudden disappearance. Fellow Nurses Africa, a professional body committed to the advancement of African nurses, confirmed her passing in a statement released on Wednesday. According to the organisation, a friend raised the alarm when repeated attempts to reach Miriam failed, prompting a missing person report. Police later found her unresponsive at home. Miriam’s last known work shift was the previous Sunday, and her absence from work and her silence raised immediate concern among those close to her. The news comes just days after what should have been a joyful milestone in her life. Miriam had recently returned to the UK after holding an introduction ceremony in Nigeria, a cultural prelude to her traditional marriage. April 29 was intended to mark a special chapter in her life — instead, it became a day of mourning. “It is with deep sadness that we share the passing of Nurse Nnena Miriam,” the statement read. “Her death under such sudden and distressing circumstances has left her colleagues and loved ones devastated.” Her peers remembered Miriam as a compassionate and dedicated professional who brought warmth and commitment to her role in healthcare. “She served her community with tireless compassion and touched countless lives,” the organisation added. “Her absence will be deeply felt by all who knew her.” Authorities have not yet released details on the cause of death, and an investigation is ongoing. Her death echoes a similar incident in March 2024, when another Nigerian healthcare worker in the UK, Chidimma Ezenyili, passed away unexpectedly. Ezenyili collapsed while caring for a client and died two days later.
Federal judge rebukes Trump administration over Kilmar Abrego’s case
A federal judge in Maryland has slammed the Trump administration for its continued refusal to cooperate in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident wrongfully deported to El Salvador in what the government admits was an “administrative error.” U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis rejected a fresh request from the administration for more time to respond to discovery demands, ordering government officials to fully comply by Monday and setting strict new deadlines. She also cleared the way for depositions of four federal officials, to be completed by May 9. The case has ignited national debate over due process, executive power, and the limits of judicial authority in immigration matters. A Legal Tug of War Abrego Garcia was deported in March despite a 2019 court order explicitly barring his removal to El Salvador due to fears of gang-related persecution. Since then, he has been held in Salvadoran prisons, including the notorious Terrorism Confinement Centre (CECOT), raising concerns about his safety and constitutional rights. Judge Xinis has accused the administration of acting in “bad faith” repeatedly stonewalling court orders and hiding behind vague claims of privilege. “That ends now,” she wrote in a fiery ruling this week, rejecting what she described as a pattern of evasive behaviour. The Trump administration’s most recent request for delay was filed under seal, leaving the public in the dark about its contents. But Xinis clarified her position, blasting the government for “boilerplate assertions” and a “willful refusal” to cooperate. In a sharply worded order, she allowed the depositions of Robert Cerna, an ICE field director who initially called the deportation an “oversight,” and three other officials: Evan Katz (ICE), Michael Kozak (State Department), and Joseph Mazzara (DHS). She also opened the door to two additional depositions and provided the plaintiff’s file by May 7. Xinis specifically took aim at the administration’s claim that it cannot act because Abrego Garcia is now in Salvadoran custody. She said the government had mischaracterised a Supreme Court order that directed it to “facilitate” his return, a directive that upholds her original ruling. While acknowledging that some of the plaintiff’s questions were overly broad, she maintained that the government could not continue dodging accountability. The case has drawn widespread attention, including from Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen, who visited Abrego Garcia in El Salvador earlier this month and took to the Senate floor Wednesday to condemn the administration’s actions. “I’m not vouching for Mr. Abrego Garcia,” Van Hollen said, “but I am vouching for his constitutional right to due process. If Donald Trump can ignore court orders and trample one man’s rights, he threatens all of ours.” Van Hollen also revealed he had sent a letter to President Trump this week, urging compliance with the court and the return of Abrego Garcia. Despite the growing criticism, administration officials remain defiant. In an exclusive interview with CBS News, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem stated bluntly: “He is an El Salvador citizen. He is home there. If he were brought back to the United States, we would deport him again immediately.” President Trump echoed that sentiment during an ABC News interview this week. “He is not an innocent, wonderful gentleman from Maryland,” Trump said, repeating unproven allegations that Abrego Garcia is a member of the violent MS-13 gang, claims his attorneys and family vehemently deny. Asked whether he would call on El Salvador to release Abrego Garcia, Trump said, “I haven’t spoken to him [the Salvadoran president]. I leave that to the lawyers.” When pressed at a Cabinet meeting Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio offered a pointed response: “I would never tell you that [whether I spoke to El Salvador], and you know who else I’d never tell? A judge. The conduct of our foreign policy belongs to the President… not some judge.” As deadlines loom and tensions rise between the judiciary and the executive, the fate of Kilmar Abrego Garcia remains in limbo. With Judge Xinis holding firm and the Trump administration digging in, the case is shaping up to be a defining battle over constitutional rights in the immigration system. Whether Abrego Garcia will return to the U.S., or remain behind bars in a foreign prison, now depends on what unfolds over the next two weeks. For more updates on the case, follow New Daily Prime.
Ukraine, US sign minerals deal sought by Trump
Ukraine and the U.S. on Wednesday signed a deal heavily promoted by U.S. President Donald Trump that will give the United States preferential access to new Ukrainian minerals deals and fund investment in Ukraine’s reconstruction. The two countries signed the accord in Washington after months of sometimes fraught negotiations, with uncertainty persisting until the last moment with word of an eleventh-hour snag. The accord establishes a joint investment fund for Ukraine’s reconstruction as Trump tries to secure a peace settlement in Russia’s three-year-old war in Ukraine. The agreement is central to Kyiv’s efforts to mend ties with Trump and the White House, which frayed after he took office in January. Ukrainian officials have hoped that the deal would ensure continued U.S. support for Ukraine’s defence against Russia. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Ukrainian First Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko were shown signing the agreement in a photo posted on X by the Treasury, which said the deal “clearly signals the Trump Administration’s commitment to a free, sovereign, prosperous Ukraine.” Svyrydenko wrote on X that the accord provides for Washington to contribute to the fund. “In addition to direct financial contributions, it may also provide NEW assistance – for example air defense systems for Ukraine,” she said. Washington did not directly address that suggestion. The U.S. has been Ukraine’s single largest military donor since Russia’s 2022 invasion with aid of more than 64 billion euros ($72 billion), according to the Kiel Institute in Germany. Before the signing, Trump repeated on Wednesday that the U.S. should get something for its aid to Kyiv, thus the effort to secure a deal for Ukraine’s plentiful deposits of rare earth minerals. In announcing the deal, the U.S. Treasury said the partnership recognized “the significant financial and material support that the people of the United States have provided to the defense of Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion.” Svyrydenko said the accord allowed Ukraine to “determine what and where to extract” and that its subsoil remains owned by Ukraine. Ukraine is rich in natural resources including rare earth metals which are used in consumer electronics, electric vehicles and military applications, among others. Global rare-earth mining is currently dominated by China, which is locked in a trade war with the U.S. after Trump’s sharp tariff increases. Ukraine also has large reserves of iron, uranium and natural gas. Svyrydenko said Ukraine has no debt obligations to the United States under the agreement, a key point in the lengthy negotiations between the two countries. The deal also, she said, complied with Ukraine’s constitution and Ukraine’s campaign to join the European Union, key elements in Ukraine’s negotiating position. The minerals deal and U.S. peace efforts have been negotiated separately but reflect Washington’s approach to Ukraine and Russia. Trump has upended U.S. policy by softening the U.S. stance toward Russia and sometimes falsely blaming Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy for the war. U.S. peace proposals have called for recognition of Russia’s claim to Crimea, which it seized from Ukraine in 2014, and potentially four other Ukrainian regions. Zelenskiy has said Kyiv would never do so because it would contravene Ukraine’s constitution. “Importantly, the Agreement sends a signal to global partners that long-term cooperation with Ukraine – over decades – is not only possible but reliable,” Svyrydenko said on X. A draft of the U.S.-Ukraine agreement seen by Reuters earlier on Wednesday showed Ukraine secured the removal of any requirement for it to pay back the U.S. for past military assistance, something Kyiv had staunchly opposed. The draft did not provide any concrete U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine, one of its initial goals. Separately, Ukraine has discussed with European allies the forming of an international force to help ensure Ukraine’s security if a peace agreement is reached with Russia. Read also: Three killed in Russian attack on Ukraine pavlohrad
