Transcription
Well, it's official: the United States and Europe relationship is over. What happened at the Oval Office between Donald Trump and Zelensky last week is going to have global ramifications for the entire world order.
By now, I'm sure you've seen the viral video clips of Zelensky and Trump's meeting in the Oval Office. But no one could have imagined the meeting between these two presidents going down like this: "You don't have the cards right now with us. You start having cards, cards right now. You don't see you're gambling with the lives of millions of people. You're gambling with World War I. You're gambling with World War I."
Zelensky flew to Washington, D.C. because Ukraine reached a deal with Trump that would send future revenue of Ukrainian mineral sales to the U.S. government. Ukraine has large underground deposits of critical minerals, including lithium, graphite, cobalt, titanium, and rare earths such as scandium. All of these are essential for an array of industries, from defense to electric vehicles. This is obviously something that Donald Trump most certainly wants, especially considering that China processes nearly 90% of the world's rare earths, giving the Chinese significant control over the global supply chain. I'll explain more on that later.
But with Trump relaunching an aggressive trade war with China and expanding tariffs, China and the U.S. will be locked into an intense trade war for years to come. Trump must do everything he can to leverage Ukraine in the best way that benefits U.S. government interests. But Zelensky wanted more; he wanted the U.S. government to provide security guarantees to Ukraine to prevent future conflict with Russia. But Zelensky left the White House empty-handed. Frankly speaking, this signals a major shift in geopolitics, with Trump launching new 25% tariffs against Europe and the collapse of the U.S.-EU partnership. One thing is clear: Europe is no longer an ally of the United States.
With limited military, economic, and technological influence, Europe finds itself sidelined in the very negotiations that concern its own continent. Trump's advance made it clear to the world that the war in Ukraine will end on America's terms. To show you just how quickly the political landscape has changed since Trump entered the White House, just observe the incredible pivot from NATO President Mark Rutte, who said on October 24th, 2024: "Ukraine's path to membership is irreversible. The day will come that Ukraine is a full member of NATO." At the time, Ukraine had the full support of the Biden Administration. The U.S. government was giving billions of dollars to the country and even making dangerous escalations by giving long-range missile systems to Ukraine just weeks before Biden left the White House. But just four months later, the NATO president has completely changed his stance, stating Ukraine was never promised NATO membership. Wow, what a turnaround!
On this channel, we frequently quote Henry Kissinger's famous saying: "To be an enemy of America is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal." But this situation reminds me of another famous quote attributed to Kissinger: "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." This quote sums up the situation perfectly. Ukraine has become too much of a headache for the United States, and just like that, the U.S. government is now willing to abandon the country after three years of supposed steadfast allyship. The tragedy of it all is that not only did Ukraine lose an entire generation of people and territorial concessions, but for the foreseeable future, the minerals deal—which realistically was Ukraine's only shot at leverage with Donald Trump—is lost. What rubs salt in the wound even further is that all of this is after the United States and its EU allies purposely sabotaged peace efforts several times over the past three years. Unfortunately, Ukraine is just the latest victim of U.S. foreign policy, being used as a vehicle for U.S. interests and disposed of when no longer useful.
But to truly understand this failed meeting between Trump and Zelensky, we can't just observe what happened in the White House; we actually need to go back in time two weeks when Vice President JD Vance gave a speech at the Munich Security Conference that set the stage for a more America-first approach to Europe. In his speech, JD Vance revealed five key realities about how the Trump Administration views the war and European security as a whole: (1) Vance made it abundantly clear that Europe has benefited tremendously from the U.S. government despite pursuing policies that don't align with U.S. interests; (2) Russia has a massive numerical advantage in manpower and weapons in Ukraine, and that advantage will persist regardless of further Western aid packages; (3) the United States retains substantial leverage over both parties to the conflict; (4) ending the conflict requires talking to the people involved in starting it and maintaining it; and (5) the conflict is bad for Russia, bad for Ukraine, and bad for Europe, but most importantly, it is bad for the United States.
JD Vance ended his speech at Munich with a stern message that shocked Europe. Europeans when he stated, "Neither Europe, nor the Biden Administration, nor the Ukrainians had any pathway to victory." This was true three years ago, it was true two years ago, it was true last year, and it is true today. This statement isn't just significant for what it reveals about the future of the U.S.-European strategic relationship; it also raises serious questions about the strength of NATO itself. Now that the United States has made it crystal clear that Europe is no longer a priority and that they won't even be considered relevant in negotiations to the end of the Ukraine war, the ball is in Europe's court. How will European leaders respond to this new reality? Will they continue clinging to a transatlantic alliance that no longer values them, or will they finally chart their own path?
I recently interviewed one of the most respected geopolitical insiders in the world, Kor Mapani, the former president of the United Nations Security Council, to share his thoughts on this very question. Unfortunately, "you see geopolitics is a very cruel business, and people who are naive and simplistic in their analysis of geopolitics always suffer. And yet, at the same time, some of the rules of geopolitics are also very clear. All great powers, including the United States, will always put its own interest first, right? He will never sacrifice his interest for even the best of friends, including his European friends. It was very naive for the Europeans to believe that the United States would always put European interests first in, say, dealing with Russia."
I'll be launching my full interview with Professor Mapani next week, but for now, I want you to focus on his recent article for Foreign Affairs, entitled "It's time for Europe to do the unthinkable." Inside this article, Professor Mapani lays out three unthinkable options for Europe, and I'm going to break them all down and explain why Europe must start thinking outside the box and charting a new path forward without the United States. First, Europe should announce its willingness to quit NATO. A Europe that's forced to spend 5% of its GDP on defense is a Europe that no longer needs the United States. If European leaders finally invested in their own security, they would have a $1.1 trillion military budget, comparable to the U.S. defense budget of $824 billion in 2024. That would be a real show of independence, one that would force Trump to take Europe seriously. But instead, Europe's insistence on staying in NATO despite Trump's repeated provocations is making them look weak; they're clinging to an alliance that doesn't respect them, practically begging to remain under Washington's thumb.
The second option: strike a new grand bargain with Russia. European leaders scoff at the idea, convinced that Russia is some existential threat. But let's be real: no one is marching on Moscow again—not Napoleon, not Hitler. And there's a glaring contradiction in Europe's messaging. On one hand, they mock Russia's inability to defeat Ukraine, a country of 38 million with a GDP of $189 billion. But then they turn around and say that this same Russia somehow threatens all of Europe, a bloc with 744 million people and a $27 trillion economy. Which one is it? A realistic compromise with Russia that secures current borders and neutralizes Ukraine's position would instantly reduce tensions. Yet European leaders refuse to even consider it. And that leads us to Mapani's third option: work out a new strategic deal with China. The only reason Washington is in conflict with China is because it refuses to accept a multipolar world; it demands global primacy. Europe, on the other hand, has zero reason to follow this path. If anything, China offers Europe a lifeline, one that could solve one of its greatest long-term crises: Africa's population boom. In 1950, Europe had twice the population of Africa. By 2100, Africa will be six times larger. If Africa doesn't industrialize and develop, Europe will be overwhelmed with migration. So what does Europe do? Instead of working with China to invest in African development, create jobs, and stabilize migration, they're actively opposing China's efforts simply because Washington told them to. Brussels is betting that if they stay loyal to U.S. geopolitical priorities, they'll be rewarded. But so far, all they've gotten is humiliation.
Don't forget the core message of Mapani's realist argument shared earlier: every great power prioritizes its own interest, even at the expense of its allies. Trump understands this; Russia understands this; the only one who doesn't seem to get it is Europe. The only path forward is for Europe to finally declare strategic autonomy. If they don't, they'll remain exactly where they are now: trapped, irrelevant, and powerless on the world stage. And frankly speaking, what do the Europeans have to lose? China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi even outlined a future for what this relationship could yield in a recent speech. Wang proposed to merge China's Belt and Road Initiative with Europe, stating, "China is willing to synergize high-quality Belt and Road cooperation with the European Union's Global Gateway strategy so as to empower each other and empower the entire world." This undoubtedly would give immense benefit to Europe. Crazily enough, China made the same proposal to the United States when they launched the Belt and Road Initiative, and the U.S. flatly rejected the offer. Later, John Kerry, who was the Secretary of State at the time, said this was one of the biggest mistakes of his career—not to work with the Chinese on this project. "You told the story about Kerry and Obama and how Kerry was invited to join the the One Belt, One Road initiative. I I'd never heard that story before. Yeah. Um, we'd be we'd be in a very different position today if if—by the way, by the way, Kerry goes on to say, you know, in life you have these missed opportunities. It's the single biggest missed opportunity in my life politically." Those are striking words to come from someone who was serving in Washington for four decades and was very close to becoming the U.S. president in 2004. Europe should not make the same mistake and must move quickly while such an opportunity is still diplomatically available.
Europe is now standing at its most uncertain crossroads since the end of World War II. The transatlantic alliance, once thought to be unshakable, has been completely shattered before our eyes. Trump has made it abundantly clear that the U.S. no longer sees Europe as a priority. Instead of adapting to this new reality, European leaders remain stuck in the past, clinging to a partnership that Washington has already walked away from. One thing is certain: the world is changing, and for the first time in nearly a century, Europe is no longer in control of its own future. The only question is: will they take back control, or will they let history be written for them?
But as promised, I want to shift to the investing portion of today's video and explain exactly why ending the war in Ukraine and receiving 50% of the country's future revenue for mineral deposits is such a priority for Donald Trump. You see, Trump's first 45 days in office have made it abundantly clear that he wants to lock in America's access to the world's most critical minerals. Trump's stated goal is to "drill, baby, drill," and he has already slapped tariffs on aluminum and steel, and most likely copper is next. Check out this quote from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2025, which states: "Copper is a critical mineral due to its essential applications in energy infrastructure and defense, with U.S. production of 1.2 million tons offset by significant imports, highlighting supply chain risks." On February 14th, Executive Order 14213 was issued by the Trump administration's National Energy Dominance Council. This directive implicitly prioritizes copper as a critical resource because of its pivotal role in national energy security and economic strategy. Given that China consumes 57% of the world's copper, the executive order emphasizes the urgent need for the United States to enhance its domestic copper production.
Giant Mining, which trades under the symbol BFGf, is proud to sponsor today's video. Not only does it operate a copper, silver, gold project in Nevada, but it also recorded its best-ever drill intercepts in September 2024. Nevada, where Giant Mining's copper project is situated, constantly ranks among the top mining jurisdictions in the world, and it's also the state where I live and work, which is why I'm bringing this company to your attention. Giant Mining's treasury is now fully funded for its drilling programs in 2025 and is well positioned to accelerate its exploration efforts and potentially capitalize on emerging copper market opportunities. In the past four years, management and the company's geologists have actually expanded the copper deposit, and this past September, Giant Mining hit their best-ever drill hole. BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, two of the world's largest copper producers, are warning that copper supply cannot possibly meet the future demand from artificial intelligence and the construction renaissance in the U.S. and China. Goldman Sachs warns of a deficit deepening in 2025 and continuing through 2027, with prices potentially hitting $115,000 a ton. BMI predicts a looming supply deficit driving long-term price gains. Meanwhile, the share price of Giant Mining, whose flagship copper, silver, gold project in Nevada is called Majuba Hill, has depreciated from a peak of $4.20 on January 13, 2023, to only 27 cents today—more than 90% lower. But since Trump's election victory on November 5th, the share price has already doubled, which is why we pay attention to geopolitics because moves in the White House can instantly impact certain industries and companies.
Giant Mining owns a past-producing mine called the Majuba Hill project, which produced copper, tin, and silver from the early 1900s to the 1950s, including 2.8 million pounds of copper, 184,000 ounces of silver, 5,800 ounces of gold, and 21,000 lbs of tin. In addition, the infrastructure for Giant Mining is ready for the next phase of development; they have access roads, power and water supply, transportation, ore stockpiles, and a processing plant in place and ready to go. Giant Mining just hit their highest-grade hole to date from surface all the way down to 218 ft. Therefore, when I combine Trump's new pro-business administration, the new minerals legislation which includes copper as a critical resource, the looming supply shortage, and the fact that Giant Mining's share price is already up 100% since Trump's inauguration, the potential for this company is very bright. CEO David Greenway recently said the company is fully funded for an active year of exploration and development drilling at Majuba Hill, and the entire Giant Mining team has high hopes of making 2025 Giant Mining's most exciting year yet. With Goldman Sachs forecasting copper prices to reach $115,000 a ton in 2025, now is the time to do your own homework and research more about Giant Mining and the potential of investing in copper. To help you with that, I'll include the company's website and investor presentation in the description below. And please do your own research before making any investments. As always, thank you for your support, and I look forward to seeing you all in our next video soon.