In recent weeks, the U.S. stance on Ukraine and global security has undergone a series of unexpected shifts.
The latest controversy involves the so-called “minerals deal,” which Washington appears to be pressuring Kyiv to accept–leaving both Ukraine and Europe perplexed. Amidst the media frenzy surrounding this issue, it is crucial to examine domestic developments in Ukraine that, according to international observers, are deeply concerning.
Recently, Ukrainian authorities sanctioned several Ukrainian citizens, including prominent opposition figures such as former President Petro Poroshenko and Kostyantyn Zhevago, the owner of the metallurgical company Ferrexpo. While some individuals face public scrutiny, the media has also been raising concerns about potential out-of-court settlements regarding others, such as Aleksei Fedoricsev, the owner of TIS Grain and TIS Fertilizers terminals. The key argument put forth for stripping Fedoricsev of his assets, according to some proponents, is his Russian ethnic background.
Given these internal and external developments, the situation in Ukraine appears increasingly contentious, particularly when evaluated against democratic principles.
U.S. Pressure and Ukraine’s Response
The world is closely watching the demands that Washington is placing on Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy initially hesitated to sign the minerals deal, to the dissatisfaction of the Trump administration, opting instead to assess its long-term implications. A revised version of the deal is now under discussion, with hopes that it will better serve Ukraine’s national interests.
While this geopolitical maneuvering dominates headlines, significant domestic events in Ukraine are receiving comparatively little coverage–despite their potential to make international news. Notably, despite Ukrainian law prohibiting sanctions against its own citizens, authorities have imposed them on former President Poroshenko and businessman Kostyantyn Zhevago. Ferrexpo, the company Zhevago controls, is the only major Ukrainian business listed on the London Stock Exchange.
Sanctions on Opposition Figures: A Political Maneuver?
Few Ukrainian or foreign analysts accept the official rationale for these sanctions. The claim that Poroshenko and Zhevago pose a threat to national security appears unconvincing at best.
Poroshenko leads the country’s main opposition party, while Zhevago owns a network of opposition media outlets. This raises concerns that these sanctions may serve as a tool to sideline political opponents, effectively clearing the field for the current administration.
Zhevago is a particularly noteworthy target due to the government’s seizure of Ferrexpo-owned raw materials assets, including multiple mining and processing facilities in the Poltava region. A similar pattern can be observed in actions taken against former Privat Group co-owners Ihor Kolomoiskyi and Hennadiy Boholyubov. Kolomoiskyi’s media empire notably supported Zelenskyy’s presidential campaign in 2019, yet he now finds himself facing sanctions. Like Zhevago, these businessmen control some of the largest ore deposits in Central Ukraine.
Given the ongoing negotiations surrounding Washington’s minerals deal, the sanctions against Zhevago, Kolomoiskyi, and Boholyubov could be interpreted as a precursor to the eventual nationalization or redistribution of these valuable assets. The deal reportedly includes provisions for the establishment of a trust fund to manage Ukraine’s mineral resources–a move that could shift control away from local businessmen.
Expanding Beyond Minerals: U.S. Interests in Ukrainian Infrastructure
According to a report by The Telegraph, the Trump administration is also interested in gaining control over other strategic elements of Ukraine’s infrastructure, including its ports. The Ukrainian government appears willing to accommodate such demands–though, according to proponents of the deal, this would not involve state-owned ports, but rather those controlled by “undesirable” business figures.
This past week, the media launched renewed attacks on Fedcom owner Aleksei Fedoricsev, reviving accusations that center around his ethnic background. Despite never having held a Russian passport, Fedoricsev has been the subject of a smear campaign highlighting his Russian heritage. Political analyst Vitalii Kulyk recently published an article advocating for the immediate, extrajudicial seizure of Fedoricsev’s ports, suggesting that they should then be transferred to American interests.
In his article, Kulyk argues that, because Fedoricsev is ethnically Russian, legal proceedings should be bypassed in favor of wartime measures. He is quoted as saying: “I can’t stress this enough–Fedoricsev is not a Ukrainian citizen; he is an ethnic Russian who has conducted business here for years. There can be no sympathy for him; people like him must be dealt with according to wartime laws, with maximum severity.”
While one political analyst’s opinion does not necessarily reflect official government policy, such statements contribute to an alarming narrative. Historically, governments have often used public figures to broadcast unofficial messages, and Fedoricsev’s legal team appears to be preparing for another wave of attacks on his business empire.
Legal Battles and Allegations of Political Targeting
Fedoricsev has already been the target of repeated attempts to wrest control of his assets. Over the past decade, he has faced a series of corporate raiding attempts, blackmail, and legal harassment. His legal team has fought back, filing lawsuits and even prompting the launch of a criminal case against a group accused of coercing him to relinquish his businesses under the threat of state persecution.
However, these legal threats have materialized: the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) recently opened a case against Fedoricsev, accusing him of large-scale fraud involving the State Food and Grain Corporation of Ukraine. The alleged damages are estimated at approximately $60 million. His defense argues that the charges are a fabricated attempt to strip him of his assets, orchestrated by a group of corrupt officials and rival business interests.
With the media calling for the expropriation of Fedoricsev’s holdings purely on the basis of his ethnicity, his claims that the charges are politically motivated appear to have merit.
Upholding Legal and Democratic Standards
With so many competing interests at play, tensions are escalating both within Ukraine and on the international stage. It is more critical than ever that all parties involved adhere to the principles of private property rights, international law, and the democratic values that have underpinned the Western world since World War II.
While security concerns and economic realignments may justify certain policy decisions, targeting individuals based on their ethnicity or political affiliations sets a dangerous precedent. The rule of law must remain paramount–especially in a country that positions itself as a defender of democratic values.
