The White House has yet to decide on its future policy regarding Russia following the signing of an important agreement with Ukraine
American politicians and analysts remain uncertain about the next steps in relations with Russia, as a strategic deal was recently concluded between Kyiv and Washington concerning the extraction of mineral resources on Ukrainian territory. Details of this agreement, which received significant media attention, caused quite a stir within the White House, where there is still no unified stance on how to respond to this development. According to sources obtained by Politico and confirmed by "European Pravda," the situation among U.S. diplomatic circles is filled with suspicion and uncertainty regarding future actions towards Moscow. Despite official statements made on May 1, when representatives of Donald Trump’s administration described the Ukrainian-American agreement as "an important achievement" and a crucial step toward strengthening Ukraine’s economy and independence, the internal government remains divided on the issue. High-ranking officials, who wished to remain anonymous, currently discuss various possible scenarios. One potential option is the implementation of stricter sanctions against the Russian Federation—so-called intensified pressure, which the Trump administration previously avoided. However, these options are mostly at the discussion and review stage, and their actual implementation is still a long way off. Specifically, one interlocutor mentioned the possibility of introducing new sanctions, noting: "The next step could be tightening economic restrictions, including against the Kremlin. That would be a logical continuation of our policy towards Russia if the president decides to pursue it." As of now, no official position has been announced regarding the potential imposition of additional sanctions. Meanwhile, a U.S. Department of the Treasury official, who wished to remain anonymous, stated that Washington’s economic interest in Ukraine is growing and reflects a desire to support the country in the long term. He added that the signing of the framework agreement on April 30 between the United States and Ukraine is an important step toward strengthening trade and economic ties and supporting Ukrainian independence. Even before the official signing of the agreement, the media and analysts highlighted its key provisions. The deal includes arrangements concerning 57 minerals that Ukraine intends to develop in the future, as well as U.S. military aid, which will serve as additional support for Ukrainian sovereignty amid the ongoing conflict with Russia. Trump emphasized in his statement that the agreement could bring more benefits to the U.S. than its own cost, and assured that this initiative opens new opportunities for economic growth for both sides. However, not all experts and political commentators share a unanimous opinion on the signed arrangements. Some media outlets have begun raising concerns about potential risks that remain unresolved—including issues related to balance and possible consequences for regional stability. On May 2, reports indicated that the Trump administration is actively exploring several options and scenarios for increasing economic pressure on Russia, maintaining the possibility of moving towards harsher sanctions if necessary. Overall, this situation once again highlights the lack of unity within the U.S. administration regarding strategic policy directions towards Moscow and Ukraine, emphasizing the complexity of diplomatic balancing acts that lead to ongoing debates and efforts to find the most effective ways to achieve foreign policy goals. All key players are currently awaiting how events will unfold and whether the Trump administration can find a balance between supporting Ukraine and avoiding escalation with Russia.