Investment in Ukraine’s Mining Sector Will Be Measured in Relationships, Not Just Resources
❮ VSG News
Minister of Energy of Ukraine Herman Halushchenko (photo: CC-BY-SA licence)
OPINION
Ukraines extractives potential is vast—but unlocking it depends less on mineral reserves and more on the alignment of capital, political will, and the right people in the room.
★ Article by Arno Saffran, Thu 02 Oct, 2025The future of Ukraine’s mining industry will not be determined by its mineral deposits alone, nor even by the availability of long-term financing. It will hinge on whether the right agreements can be struck—between capital and country, between public ambition and private risk, and above all, between people who can credibly stand at that intersection.
Despite macroeconomic headwinds, the case for investing in Ukraine’s mining and processing sector is compelling. The country holds a significant share of Europe’s iron ore and titanium reserves, and it sits at the geographic and strategic hinge between East and West. Yet the challenge has never been geological—it is relational. Capital requires more than opportunity. It requires structure, stability, and the assurance that interests are aligned, and that risk—be it political, regulatory, or reputational—has been accounted for in more than name only.
Capital Requires Structure, Not Sentiment
Since the onset of full-scale conflict in 2022, Ukraine has become a recipient of unprecedented humanitarian and financial support. But as the country looks to industrial recovery and long-term fiscal self-reliance, attention must shift from donor aid to investment-grade opportunity.
To enable this shift, Ukraine must do more than liberalise its currency regime or reduce interest rates. While cheap long-term debt is necessary, it is not sufficient. High-capex industrial projects—such as mineral processing plants, sintering operations, or energy-intensive refining facilities—require structured agreements that can withstand market cycles and political transition. These agreements are not written into existence. They are negotiated, shaped, and stewarded by individuals with the trust and mandate to bring governments, investors, operators, and local stakeholders into functional alignment.
The Relationship is the Risk Mitigation
In high-risk jurisdictions, a project’s success often rests less on its economics than on whether the right people are in the room early enough to shape it. Access to decision-makers, fluency in informal authority structures, and credibility with both domestic and foreign stakeholders are not soft factors—they are structural preconditions for investment.
When Ukraine’s major mining groups advocate for low-cost capital and a predictable regulatory environment, they are pointing to a broader truth: stability is rarely the default condition—it is created. Whether through strategic partnerships, joint ventures, or offtake agreements, it is the quality of relationships—not the quantity of resource—that determines bankability.
This is particularly true where geopolitical tensions, infrastructure fragility, or institutional bottlenecks remain part of the investment landscape. In such contexts, the human infrastructure is as critical as the physical one.
Agreements Precede Investment
Before capital is deployed, relationships must be formed. Before feasibility is finalised, political and commercial will must be aligned. Before a board can approve investment, confidence must exist that the legal framework will be honoured, the currency risk contained, and the domestic partner aligned in purpose and capability.
These are not incidental conditions. They are often the result of months, if not years, of groundwork laid by individuals who understand both the commercial imperatives of international capital and the political and cultural nuance of the host country.
In frontier and post-conflict markets, there are rarely clear paths. The bridge between opportunity and execution must be built. And people are the bridge.
Returns Require More Than Resources
For investors, Ukraine’s mining sector holds the promise of long-term returns. But those returns will only materialise where projects are structured for resilience—where agreements are designed not only to capture value, but to preserve it under strain. That structure depends on trust: between local and foreign partners, between financiers and regulators, and between those who negotiate terms and those who enforce them.
This is where leadership matters most—not simply operational or technical leadership, but relationship leadership. The kind that understands when to formalise and when to withhold, how to balance sovereign interest with investor protection, and how to navigate the quiet power structures that govern influence well beyond the boardroom.
Conclusion: No Progress Without Presence
Industrial ambition is easy to articulate. Execution is harder. In Ukraine, as in many emerging and post-crisis markets, the success of high-impact projects will come down to who shows up early, who is trusted to stay, and who is capable of translating ambition into actionable, risk-adjusted agreement.
Cheap capital may enable. Regulatory reform may unlock. But it is people—the right people—who make investment real.
References
How relevant and useful is this article for you?
★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 102
ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)
— Arno Saffran
Arno developed his approach through roles in client development (McKinsey) and strategic commercial engagement (affiliated with advisories including Hakluyt), focusing on complex industrial and energy sectors.
VSG works across the extractive value chain, positioning people who form the critical bridge to early-stage relationships and commercial access in complex markets.
