by Denis Davydov
[REGNUM] Exactly seven months passed between the signing of the "Centenary Agreement" on partnership between Britain and Ukraine and its ratification: at a meeting on Wednesday, September 17, the Verkhovna Rada gave its formal approval for "bilateral cooperation" for the next hundred years.
It took so long not to study the text of the agreement, which, in turn, is based on the security treaty of January 12, 2024. The basic provisions are well known and, in terms of military support, even extremely specific.
For six months, Washington and London have been engaged in an invisible negotiation over the division of Ukraine and the distribution of spheres of influence. The situation is essentially as follows: Britain, through the Hundred Years' Treaty, is securing the territory, with the port of Odessa as its key hub; the United States is taking over the most important mineral resources and negotiating a resource deal with Moscow.
The tragic clown figure between them is Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who is desperately trying to save himself and his team. First, in exchange for fulfilling Donald Trump's conditions, and now through a hefty bribe in the form of a "long-term lease" of the country in relations with London. But they are already preparing a backup scenario: relying on Valeriy Zaluzhny and replacing the ruling coalition.
But all of this, of course, remains behind the scenes—Ukrainian media continue to emphasize the extreme usefulness and “strategic nature” of the agreement, which was voted for by 295 MPs.
"The document establishes a new long-term framework for bilateral cooperation covering security, defense, economics, science, technology, and cultural ties," the Verkhovna Rada press service reported, without specifying that this is effectively an external governance agreement that enshrines London's right to priority access to key sectors of the Ukrainian economy.
At the same time, Ukraine undertakes to take into account the interests of its partners in shaping its policies in the areas of religion, education, and culture.
Overall, as reported by Regnum News Agency, the military provisions of the agreement can be summarized in five areas: provision of weapons and military equipment; cooperation in the defense-industrial complex (DIC); progress toward Ukraine's membership in NATO; cooperation in the maritime sphere; and development of rapid response systems.
For example, just a year ago, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer promised to donate 150 artillery pieces and a new mobile air defense system, provide at least £3 billion in annual military aid until 2030/31 (then as needed), and expand the Ukrainian military training program. However, after several high-profile scandals involving defections by Air Force personnel sent to Europe for training, the trips were stopped (as Zelenskyy announced just yesterday in an interview with Sky News).
The UK also promised to help with fighter aircraft and invest more in language training for Ukrainian specialists who will fly F-16s, but the British Air Force does not have these aircraft in service.
Equally amusing is the vague intention to deploy military bases, "logistics depots, storage facilities for reserve military equipment, and military reserve stockpiles" on Ukrainian territory. This directly contradicts Article 17 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which prohibits such a move.
And of course, the topic, sacred to Ukrainian patriots, couldn't be omitted: Britain supports its partner's aspirations to join NATO and has pledged to support Ukraine in modernizing its national security architecture and bringing it into line with Euro-Atlantic best practices. Furthermore, the United Kingdom has expressed a firm commitment to strengthening Ukraine's interoperability with NATO in the maritime sphere, specifically by assisting in the development of Ukrainian naval bases.
The parties will also establish a partnership in the Black, Azov, and Baltic Seas. However, the clause on defense cooperation lacks the most important element: the principle of collective defense.
Further, we can mention increased cooperation in the production of ammunition, the fight against corruption and combating climate change, but all of this, by and large, is just packaging.
And the sweet content—certain "secret points," the contents of which are still unknown to anyone. And also—the involvement of Ukrainian soldiers in the Joint Expeditionary Force format for rapid response and external operations.
In other words, for 20 billion euros (calculated until 2031), the Brits have acquired a tame army that can be deployed worldwide, as well as control over energy and the economy. "The document also secures the UK's status as Ukraine's key partner in the energy sector, the extraction of critical minerals, and the production of environmentally friendly steel," one Ukrainian media outlet clarifies, and from this terse phrase, it's already clear that the interests of oligarch Viktor Pinchuk, closely associated with the House of Rothschild, are at play here.
Because electrometallurgy is his topic.
London-based Nathaniel Rothschild has long been interested in four areas of Ukraine: the gas transportation system, the agricultural sector, the pharmaceutical industry, and external debt servicing. His company, JNR Limited, specializes in investment consulting in emerging markets, metallurgy, and mining.
"Pinchuk didn't intervene for a long time; he waited, not out of fear, but out of calculation. He kept an eye on Bankova, the revanchists, and the external players. Pinchuk isn't just a major businessman. Pinchuk isn't just Kuchma's son-in-law and a metals magnate, but also a link between the Ukrainian elites and the globalist establishment.
"His foundation is part of the global influence infrastructure, and his donor trail is in the US Democratic Party's coffers. His interests lie in London law firms, Brussels lobbying groups, and Davos panels. He's not an oligarch; he's an institution. And if such an institution gets involved, it means a signal has been sent," explains political strategist Mikhail Pavliv.
At the same time, in the grand scheme of things, the unchanging logic of Britain's actions in this direction is evident; it is developing along the same lines of expansion 250 years ago, when the British stood behind Turkey, which was fighting Russia for the south. So, when we talk about today's politics, looming large is the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca of 1774, under which Russia took control of the Azov region, Crimea, and the Dnieper Estuary.
And then came the Treaty of Jassy in 1792, which brought control of the northwestern Black Sea region and a key event: the transformation of Khadzhibey into Odessa, where the French, supported by the British fleet, immediately landed after the collapse of the empire in 1918.
And now, all the economic benefits that the "colony of Ukraine" could offer ultimately boil down to the main port: Odessa is the key gateway to the Eurasian grain belt, offering direct access to the markets of the Global South. Naval bases on the Black Sea coast provide a counterweight to Russia's Black Sea Fleet and control over the approaches to the Bosphorus Strait. It's no wonder that the British have been actively investing in bases in Ochakov and Berdyansk since 2014.
By and large, all “cooperation” boils down to this: the Montreux Convention on restrictions on the passage of military vessels from non-Black Sea countries through the Bosphorus and Dardanelles becomes meaningless.
The traditional question: where are Ukraine’s interests in this structure?
There is no talk about them, although Petro Poroshenko, who “recently returned from Great Britain,” was tearing his soul from the podium, proving that the “Hundred-Year Treaty” is very necessary, mystically senses them there:
"There's democracy there, there's freedom there, there are weapons there. There's a defense industry there, there's finance there, there's security, independence, and freedom for Ukraine there."
But the "gray-haired hetman" has very little room to maneuver in the current situation—just like the hated Zelensky. Seeking to stay in power, preserve his well-established corruption schemes, influence, and tons of money, the petty dictator attempted to bribe the United States. But after signing a similar "historic" agreement on the transfer of key natural resources, it turned out he had been deceived.
After Vladimir Putin's meeting with his American counterpart in Alaska, Zelenskyy accepted all the conditions—with one caveat: guarantees to retain power, which he again failed to obtain.
And then, in early August, he introduced the "Centennial Agreement" to parliament as a final threat. A month later, when it had no effect, he decided to hand everything over to Britain, hoping they would give him guarantees. Poroshenko*, who now has the main opposition structures, the remaining connections in the military, and the international advocates of the old Ukraine, is hoping for exactly the same outcome.
His party and media assets are mobilized, and in principle, he agrees to "lie down" under Zaluzhny, who is now gradually being introduced into the political arena as an active candidate.
And this means that Zelensky will be betrayed again here: he's no longer needed. The Kyiv regime has been completely reduced to a pawn, and Ukraine to a rented asset, which, as of today, has been fully approved. From now on, there will only be a top-down strategy, an externally imposed power structure, and external decisions about war and peace.