European quota – advanced Silesia and present-day Ukraine

When a plebiscite was planned in advanced Silesia in 1919, it was clear that 2 feuded nations had to be supervised by the peacekeepers to minimize force in the plebiscite campaign.

Under Article 297 of the Versailles Treaty, the beneficiary states of the Versailles order were granted the right to apply the compulsory redemption of German property, in peculiar public property, which remained in the area taken over. Faced with the plebiscite in advanced Silesia, a rich industrial region, the French and Poles began intensive negotiations to force it to join Poland in order to later jointly manage its economical assets.

After a comparatively successful plebiscite settlement and as a consequence of the annexation of many advanced Silesian mines and steelworks to Poland, in September 1922 Skarbofer was established in a 50/50 arrangement with the participation of the Polish government and French capital. The Treasurer was an economical entity which managed the state mines and another industrial plants taken over from Germany, primarily accounting for 15-20% of inter-war coal exports. The agreement was to apply as long as 36 years with an extension option. Thus, Poles profited from the advanced Silesian mining industry, repaid France's political support on the global stage. Only, does this Polish experience remind us of the current situation of Ukraine?

In July 2021, the European Union signed a memorandum with Ukraine on a strategical partnership in critical natural materials (CRM). It is mainly about deposits of lithium, cobalt and natural graphite recognised in Ukraine. In April of the same year, the Australian company Volt Resources announced the acquisition of Ukrainian mining facilities Zavallivski Graphit operating in the central part of Ukraine, and another Australian entity of the European Lithium in December 2021 received concessions from the Ukrainian authorities to extract Donbaski Lithium. Interestingly, Chinese Chengxin Lithium, who was besides curious in acquiring the Shevchenko lithium deposit, was rejected by the Ukrainian side.

All of these negotiations and permissions were conducted a fewer months before the Russian strike in Ukraine, erstwhile the diplomatic situation was getting denser around Kiev, and Ukrainians tried at all costs to build ties with the West to supply themselves with any possible support in connection with Moscow. As with the Polish-French Treasurer, before the cannons, diplomats and lawyers were already working on the expression for allowing western partners to join the company with the resources desired by the market.

However, while the French could benefit from advanced Silesian coal until September 1939, in the case of Euro-Atlantic entities counting on profits from Ukraine, the issue is more complex.

Individual abroad entities have serious problems with the final acquisition of mining concessions due to anti-corruption investigations of Ukrainian services, the creation of legal obstacles by the Geological Office there, but above all due to the shift of the front lines and war activities.

The aforementioned European Lithium announced by the mouth of its president Tony Sage in the summertime of 2023 that the Donbaskie deposits were besides close to Russian positions and resigned from claims to it. Indeed, there have been dense front fights in the area in fresh months, and the Russians are close to occupying the area. Another thing is that the Swedish Lithium deposits are based on the 1982 russian research, but it seems to me that no 1 knows whether these deposits are technically available and at the same time profitable for mining?

The Zavallivski graphite production plant in December 2024 suspended operations, mainly due to the inprofitability of production against energy prices in Ukraine. However, this was not the only reason to suspend production. As indicated by erstwhile president of the company Roman Saramaga in an interview with Ukrainian nadra.info portal, The Australians were to pay only half of the $7.6 million foreseen for 70% of the company's shares. Ukraine has so been without production of uncommon graphite, and its business in this manufacture must court with Australian investors.

The fierce competition for access to Ukrainian deposits and infrastructure is different. In addition to the Ukraine-EU memorandum of 2021, we all remember the celebrated maps of Ukraine's regions of 2022 to be rebuilt by certain European countries and the United States. This was the culmination of a post-Swiss summit declaration in Lugano, where it was established that the economical restoration of the harm in Ukraine must be linked to the edified integration of Ukrainian society into the current EU model, namely in the spirit of "inclusiveness, sex equality and respect for number rights". These are also slogans that have not so far translated into any circumstantial actions.

The Americans under Donald Trump adopted a different strategy. They effort without a liberal envelope, and through strong pressure, simply impose on Ukraine a contract to extract deposits and operate associated infrastructure. It would fundamentally trust on joint, American-Ukrainian making money and their targeted reinvestment in Ukraine. This would take place a small bit in the context of reconstruction, a small more profit, but Trump's request is constantly rising over all of these proposals, as it were, to reimburse all the costs that the Americans had to bear in support of Ukraine, starting with his erstwhile term. This amount regularly increases and has already reached at least $500 billion.

Only can European and American expectations towards the deposits of Ukraine be as successful as the French have obtained from diplomatic support for the Polish case of advanced Silesia in the interwar? For the time being, this indicates little, and the experience of Western firms with the Ukrainian legal area, oligarchy and power during the war period suggests that only on interstate grounds is it possible to establish any concessions for Western investors that will not be challenged on the spot. However, 1 can get the impression that Trump raises the negotiation rate with Kiev so advanced that only no deal is made... but only show the senselessness of supporting Ukraine to the average American voter. Europeans, on the another hand, now have neither the force of force nor the means to keep Ukraine alive on their own and to receive mining concessions in return.

The only form of securing mining rights in post-war Ukraine seems to have taken the old French road today. Just as they then deployed troops in the advanced Silesia plebiscite area to ensure, among another things, circumstantial betting, so Europeans are openly considering sending a quota to Ukraine, which, according to the leaders, would be stationed somewhere “in the back” of the current front. If specified a mission would always go to Ukraine, what would they be watching behind? another steelworks, mines and production plants, or weakening Ukraine in all respect?

Krystian Yachts

Think Poland, No. 11-12 (16-23.03.2025)