WASHINGTON—In a recent interview, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce Matthew Murray outlined a bold new model of economic statecraft, calling the U.S.-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund an “exemplary” whole-of-government approach to securing critical minerals, rebuilding Ukraine, and reshaping transatlantic economic ties in the face of growing Chinese and Russian resource dominance.
Unlike traditional diplomacy, Murray said economic statecraft coordinates tools across agencies — including development finance, sanctions, and private capital — to achieve national security through economic means. The new U.S.-Ukraine initiative, which centers on developing Ukraine’s vast but underexplored reserves of titanium, graphite, and lithium, seeks to turn historically conflict-prone natural resources into anchors of peace and democratic cooperation.
The deal also aims to accelerate Ukraine’s legal and governance reforms, including regulatory transparency, digitization of geological data, and the declassification of Soviet-era resource maps—critical prerequisites for attracting “smart, long-term capital.” Other recent moves, like passage of a public-private partnership law and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development-backed exploration projects, are already underway.
Chairman of the advisory board of Velta Holding U.S., a titanium producer operating in Ukraine, Murray said his firm already supplies 2% of global feedstock and is planning to scale production and vertical integration. “We want to become a flagship case of how this partnership works,” he said.
The U.S.-Ukraine critical minerals partnership, if successful, could provide a new model for global economic engagement—one that fuses democracy, transparency, and development into a resilient foundation for long-term peace.
The following interview was recorded on July 27, 2025, and has been edited for length and clarity.
Independence Avenue Media Editor in Chief Ia Meurmishvili: I would very much like to get your thoughts on an idea you often talk and write about, which is the economic statecraft, and how it fits into rare earth minerals that we’ll be talking about during the interview. What is it? What do you mean by this concept?
Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce (2013-2014) Matthew Murray: Economic statecraft is different from traditional diplomacy or traditional commercial diplomacy, because it endeavors to combine all the tools in the [U.S. government] toolkit into one set of policies and initiatives. It includes straight diplomacy but also includes a role for the private sector. It includes a role for arms of the U.S. government that engage in public investment, such as the [Export-Import Bank] and the International Development Finance Corporation. It includes a role for economic sanctions, both as a carrot and a stick for conduct. So, economic statecraft is more ambitious and tries to involve all the U.S. government departments and agencies that have a role in foreign economic policy in one whole-of-government approach.
Meurmishvili: How would you connect the concept of economic statecraft with the minerals deal that the United States signed with Ukraine not too long ago?
Murray: Yes, I do think that this project, this deal, which formed a new United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, is an exemplary form of economic statecraft on the part of both countries. What it does differently and how it innovates is that, first of all, it seeks to transform the relationship between the United States and Ukraine by focusing on economic security as a key component of national security. And the structure of this agreement is to basically bring in all forms of diplomacy, investment, private sector participation, civil society participation, economic reform and modernization, and roll it into one initiative. The goal here is for the U.S. and Ukraine to be able to develop a key resource — namely critical raw materials in Ukraine—which have previously been undeveloped or not developed at scale. While doing that, this agreement will form a cornerstone or a building block of a new pathway towards peace between Russia and Ukraine. The idea, as explained by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko, is that this joint commitment in developing Ukraine’s CRMs will create a mutual basis for economic growth and prosperity that benefits citizens of the United States and of Ukraine, and which acts as a deterrent to future military aggression by Russia. This initiative has all the promise and potential of a bold economic statecraft innovation.
Globally, it makes a statement that, where critical minerals have often been a driver of conflict and war, this vision converts the development of critical raw materials between two democratic nations into a source of stability, peace, and conflict prevention.
The U.S.-Ukraine deal could indeed serve as a model for U.S. engagement with other parts of the world in developing this sector. Of course, one of the benefits to the United States is it will position itself to compete with China more effectively. That is one of our national security objectives. The United States is looking at a world in which it is highly dependent on China, Russia and other countries for 50 different critical raw materials. So the U.S. has to strengthen both the sourcing of those materials (as in production and mining) and the processing of those materials (as in applying them to critical parts for defense and aerospace and other industries).
Meurmishvili: So, this deal is not strictly commercial in nature, but also serves as a model for U.S. engagement with other countries and, additionally, provides security for Ukraine? That’s what you’re saying?
Murray: That’s right. It’s not strictly commercial, although the role of the private sector is key to the success of the enterprise. The agreement has a set of policy objectives that include stability, peace, and conflict prevention, but also helping Ukraine modernize their critical raw materials industry and all the legal infrastructure that surrounds that industry. This agreement is there to help promote foreign direct investment in that industry. Another benefit of this agreement is it will place priority around making sure of developing the regulations, the geological data, and the anti-corruption elements of the legal and regulatory structure in a manner that draws in foreign investment. This agreement will help Ukraine upgrade and modernize all of that.
The role of the private sector is also critical. The signing of this agreement acts as a catalyst to attract “smart money,” long-term patient money and risk capital that will take another look at Ukraine because both governments are committing their public resources and trying to create the conditions in which these investments in this industry are both efficient and secure and have a level of political risk insurance in them.
Meurmishvili: It basically will improve governance?
Murray: Yes, it will act as an accelerant to continue governance reforms that are already underway in Ukraine, and that’s already in evidence. A couple of weeks ago, the Rada passed in its second reading a new law on the formation of public-private partnerships, which will increase transparency and make the regulatory guidelines for how to pursue a public-private partnership more predictable and accessible for all participants. The other example of recent reforms is they have gone ahead and started to declassify the information around the geological data of where these critical raw materials lie in Ukraine.
But there’s much more reform that needs to happen. For example, the geology needs to be digitized and made available to everybody because markets function best based on good information. But again, these are reform actions and steps that have been accelerated by the signing of this agreement and the beginning of the implementation of this agreement.
Meurmishvili: Perception of corruption often comes up when people talk about investing in Ukraine. Do you think this deal will help in that regard?
Murray: Well, that’s a very good question. First, Ukraine has to be commended and supported for their efforts to continue to fight corruption and Russia at the same time. They’ve been doing that now for 3 1/2 years. I’ve participated in several initiatives to implement major anti-corruption reforms both by building stronger institutions, passing better laws, and following best practices for prevention of corruption. In that context, this agreement is an asset because it will focus reform efforts on a key sector. And the best anti-corruption reform takes place sector-by-sector. This is an area which has been neglected, I think, from the point of view of the government of Ukraine, in terms of development, regulatory modernization, and anti-corruption. Now there will be a whole-of-government effort on the part of the government of Ukraine to make sure that this is a very transparent sector and that the signals that are sent to major foreign direct investors are very clear, and that it’s understood that they will get their money out on very favorable terms. I’ve seen that Ukrainians are very committed to implementing these reforms through not only the passage of a new law on public-private partnerships, but also in discussions at the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Rome with key government officials, including the Prime Minister Svyrydenko and now Minister of Economy Oleksii Sobolev. I’ve seen that they are very committed to implementing the agreement on the Reconstruction Investment Fund. They want to operationalize it, and they are trying to put all the government resources and tools behind this agreement, including, most importantly, political will to make those reforms happen.
Meurmishvili: Earlier you mentioned there are about 50 minerals the U.S. considers critical to national security. How many of those minerals does Ukraine have? And does Ukraine know where they are located?
Murray: The number that is frequently cited is that Ukraine has at least 20, if not more, of the minerals that are critical to United States economic security. Many of them are located in the region that we operate, Kirovohrad region. When I was at the Ukraine Recovery Conference two weeks ago, I got the opportunity to meet with the governor of that region. He told me that three of the top minerals on the U.S. list, including not only titanium, but also graphite and lithium, are in that central region of Ukraine.
There are other parts of Ukraine now occupied by Russia, unfortunately, that also have these minerals. They’re widely dispersed. Some of them are more secure than others, and many of them are not yet developed and explored. If you look at the map, you see a significant amount and volume of critical raw materials, but there needs to be an understanding of where they’re located, how they can be produced, and how they can be scaled. And then, very importantly, Ukraine needs to be processing these minerals. Processing them is the most important space of competition, where democracies need to compete with the Chinese. There’s a lot of exploration work yet to be done, and there are projects on the books in graphite, lithium and titanium in the Kirovohrad region as we speak.
Meurmishvili: There is a big controversy over the location of these deposits. [Some experts claim that most of the Ukrainian mineral deposits are located in the Russian-occupied territories in eastern Ukraine.] Do we know where the mines are located? What are the maps that the United States is using for guidance?
Murray: The data that’s available needs to be updated. Generally speaking, it’s Soviet-era data. It needs to be not only upgraded, but it needs to be put into some digital format so that these questions don’t even occur. This is fundamental to making this new market work. Markets work or don’t based on good information. This is a threshold issue. Everybody is seized with it right now. The European Union, it should be mentioned, is being very helpful in this respect. They are funding efforts to both declassify and digitize the data. Progress is being made, and I think of that as a solvable issue. It may take some time and resources to do it, but it’s very solvable.
Meurmishvili: Does the minerals deal have a language in it on this particular topic for the Ukrainians to Identify these sites?
Murray: It certainly contemplates the need to do that, but it doesn’t commit to any specific steps. It’s actually a subject of a lot of negotiation right now. What do we do about this data question? But I think it’s being approached—as many of these questions are—in a spirit of good faith and cooperation and collaboration. The teams working on this from both governments are immersed in making this work from the data point of view and from the project point of view.
Meurmishvili: On the extraction side: Let’s say the data is available and we have a digitized map of what’s where. How long does it take from that point on? Every time you read or hear about this topic the timeline varies from a couple years to up to 18-20 years to develop some of these mines. From your understanding, what is the process like after the minerals are identified?
Murray: Well, let me first put on a different hat, which is the hat that I wear as chairman of the board of an operational titanium company based in the Kirovohrad region called Velta. Velta has been producing titanium since 2014 and owns 2% of the global supply of titanium feedstock and supplies the global and U.S. market with this feedstock already.
In the case of an already operational company [such as Velta], it can scale up its titanium production. In the course of our business planning around how to expand our production in Ukraine, we’ve also discovered that we have other minerals in our mineral bed that include hafnium and zirconium derivatives. Both of those minerals are on high demand from different suppliers than we now supply, including the nuclear industry. So, when the discussion is around when can these projects be launched, we’re already in operation and we want to be a flagship that demonstrates the win-win dimension of this U.S.-Ukraine economic partnership. We want to expand on our existing operation and then we want to become vertically integrated by doing more processing of the titanium feedstock into metals that can be used by the U.S. defense and aerospace business. [And] there are other ongoing projects which are a little bit in further need of development than Velta’s titanium project.
One of them is a project in the graphite industry. It’s being managed by a group called BGV in [Ukraine and] they signed an memorandum of understanding with the European Bank for Reconstruction Development in Rome around doing more exploration. That project is moving forward. Then the government of Ukraine has also announced that they’re going to auction a lithium deposit. So, yes, it’s going to take some time, but the U.S. and Ukrainian governments are both committed to getting three projects launched before the end of the year in titanium, in graphite, in lithium.
Meurmishvili: It’s a bit of a simplistic question, but what are these minerals used for? We have all heard about titanium and graphite and some other minerals, but why are they so important? And, does the U.S. have them on American soil or does it need to get them from somewhere else?
Murray: The question that you’re asking is a question about why the United States has developed this vulnerability in the first place. What has occurred in our economy that has created a vulnerability across 50 different minerals? The answer to that is that we do have some of them underneath the ground here. We’ve been processing others. But generally speaking, the economics of the mineral business have not been very favorable in the United States because of the highly regulated nature of this business. The licensing, the permitting, the environmental compliance, and “the not in my backyard phenomenon,” right? Over a period of 30 years, the U.S. government has in effect not addressed the underlying structural impediments to better development of resources, both by pulling them out of the ground and processing them here [or elsewhere].
Now this administration has taken a decisive turn in that direction. Not only have they launched this innovative form of economic statecraft with Ukraine, but they have an executive order that is devoted to spurring development domestically in the United States of many minerals and doing so with a whole-of-government approach and with expanded authority for accelerated development of these minerals.
Your question about why they are so important? Well, some people call critical raw materials the new oil. That’s how they’re viewed. And that’s because they’re in demand for defense and aerospace. They’re also in demand for electronic vehicles and batteries for electronic vehicles. They’re in demand for consumer electronics. My iPhone uses titanium, right? This has become a front-page issue in the last couple of months because China has begun to withhold certain rare earths, which are a subcomponent of critical raw materials.
It’s important to keep the terminology straight. Critical raw materials are this list of 50 and they’re defined as critical because of weak supply chains. Rare earths are in a different category and they are composite minerals that are especially used for batteries. China has begun to withhold their export in retaliation to the tariffs that are being imposed. All these minerals, including rare earths, are needed for modern industries that depend on light and stronger metals that depend on these rare earths for batteries.
Meurmishvili: I wish we had time to talk about China—maybe some other time. To wrap this up and stay on Ukraine: Is there anything Ukraine needs to do to make this deal a success?
Murray: They’re already doing a lot. They have a team that they pulled together to actually negotiate the agreement in the first place. And they did a very good job of negotiating a deal which is equitable, which is just, and which will benefit citizens of Ukraine in the short, medium, and long term. They are committed to getting at least three projects structured before the end of the year.
They will also have to demonstrate some level of commitment from the private sector. Here’s an element which needs to be addressed, and that is, what can they do to attract Ukrainian entrepreneurs into this business? The group that I work with, Velta, is unique because they built their company with their own hands. They didn’t take it [over] or privatize it; they weren’t given the company by the government. That kind of entrepreneurial spirit and culture is what will help Ukraine develop these other assets and minerals. The government of Ukraine can take this as an opportunity to continue to dismantle oligarchic structures within Ukraine’s economy and make room for entrepreneurs. That is the most important element that they could provide at this stage. Because entrepreneurs will solve these problems if they’re given the tools and resources to do it.
Meurmishvili: That’s a very big bit of homework, isn’t it?
Murray: Yes, it is. Except this is what the Revolution of Dignity was about, right? This was a revolution for and on behalf of entrepreneurs whose core demand was that they be able to operate to create wealth free from corruption.
