Jamie Dettmer is the opinion editor at POLITICO Europe.
In December 1940, President Franklin D. Roosevelt articulated the rationale behind his plan to lend and lease wartime supplies and equipment to a struggling Britain. He likened it to offering a neighbor the use of a garden hose to extinguish a fire in their home. “You wouldn’t say to your neighbor, ‘my garden hose cost me $15; you have to pay me $15 for it,'” he explained.
All that would be requested is the return of the hose after the flames had been doused.
This scenario starkly contrasts with the approach of U.S. President Donald Trump, who might view a neighbor’s crisis as a lucrative opportunity, withholding assistance until he receives significantly more than its worth — with cash upfront.
If you perceive this as unjust or a manifestation of Trump derangement syndrome, consider the minerals deal the U.S. is attempting to impose on Ukraine during its time of existential peril.
This so-called deal of the century would see the U.S. recoup far more than the $120 billion estimated by the Kiel Institute, a German think tank, as the total aid provided to Kyiv from January 2022 to December 2024.
Under the latest terms of the deal, the U.S. would claim half of the revenue generated by Ukraine’s oil, gas, and hydrocarbons, alongside nearly all revenues from its metals, critical minerals, and other extractable resources. Additionally, the U.S. would benefit from profits associated with any infrastructure tied to these natural resources — encompassing roads, railways, pipelines, ports, terminals, and refineries. The extensive list of infrastructure benefits goes on.
Moreover, the U.S. would receive all royalties and profits from natural resources until Ukraine repays at least $100 billion in war debt to the U.S., with 4 percent interest accruing during repayment. Subsequently, Ukraine might eventually retain half of the profits and royalties generated by its own resources, though the timeline for this remains unclear. The debt referenced in the deal represents 56 percent of Ukraine’s GDP, not inclusive of interest.
This agreement, alarmingly, is perpetual.
Thus, it resembles less a Lend-Lease arrangement and more the unequal treaties that imperial Western powers imposed on China in the 19th century.
The first of these treaties, the Treaty of Nanking, concluded the First Opium War between Britain and the Qing dynasty in 1842, mandating China to pay a massive indemnity, cede Hong Kong to Britain, and open its trade to British terms, including tariff rates dictated by London.
This treaty set a precedent for a series of one-sided agreements that Western powers forced China to sign, leading to widespread expropriations, plundering, and erosion of sovereignty — factors that contribute to Beijing’s current geopolitical resentments and its determination to challenge the Western order.
However, a significant distinction between those unequal treaties and Trump’s minerals deal is that the former were imposed on adversaries following military victories, not on a supposed ally.
While Ukrainians lament the prospect of paying reparations to the U.S., it is crucial to understand that Trump’s demands do not constitute genuine “war reparations” — which are compensatory payments made by a defeated aggressor. Instead, the U.S. president is acting as a war profiteer, exploiting the situation for personal gain.
FDR’s message behind Lend-Lease was rooted in the self-interest of aiding your neighbor — the fire could spread to your own home, necessitating action to extinguish it before it does. The legislation that U.S. Congress ultimately endorsed granted Roosevelt broad authorities to “sell, transfer title to, exchange, lease, lend or otherwise dispose of” goods to other nations in the interest of U.S. national security.
At its zenith, Lend-Lease supported 38 nations with supplies and equipment amounting to approximately $50 billion — equivalent to nearly $700 billion today when adjusted for inflation. Britain received the majority of this aid, and ultimately, only around $8 billion was repaid, largely from the U.K. and France. Moreover, while the agreement stipulated the return of intact equipment, the reality was that little was ever returned. Instead, remaining supplies were sold to allies at discounted rates. No price gouging in that context.
In addition to aiding in the defeat of Nazi Germany, Benito Mussolini’s Italy, and imperial Japan, the U.S. reaped some tangible benefits from these agreements, including reverse Lend-Lease arrangements and reciprocal contributions, such as Mosquito photo-reconnaissance aircraft and aviation spark plugs for B-17 Flying Fortresses from the U.K., petroleum products from India, food from Australia and New Zealand for GIs in the South Pacific, and chrome, manganese ore, platinum, gold, and wood from Joseph Stalin.
However, these contributions were minuscule compared to what allies received from the U.S. But that was never the primary goal.
Years later, in 2022, former President Joe Biden referenced Roosevelt’s program when he enacted the Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act, providing military, economic, and humanitarian aid to Ukraine in its defense against Russia.
Trump, however, fails to recognize the self-interest inherent in supporting allies, instead asserting that the U.S. is safe due to “a big, beautiful ocean.” Roosevelt rejected this notion, cautioning in a December 1940 radio broadcast, where he introduced the concept of America becoming “the great arsenal of democracy,” that the U.S. could not remain aloof: “Some of us like to believe that even if Britain falls, we are still safe, because of the broad expanse of the Atlantic and of the Pacific.” He warned that modern technology had significantly reduced the effective distances across those oceans.
Roosevelt’s Lend-Lease agreements stipulated repayment not in monetary terms or returned equipment but required “joint action directed towards the creation of a liberalized international economic order in the postwar world.” This approach, of course, is incompatible with Trump’s agenda — he seeks to dismantle the order FDR established.
