KYIV — The Trump administration is close to a deal with Ukraine for access to hundreds of billions of dollars worth of mineral rights in a giant step toward ending Russia’s brutal war on the European nation just three days before the third anniversary of Moscow’s full-scale invasion, The Post can reveal. 

 Full details of the tentative agreement were unclear late Friday, but the good-cop-bad-cop approach of President Trump and his special envoy, retired Gen. Keith Kellogg, helped close the gap between Washington and Kyiv.

Kellogg, believed to be one of the few Trump administration officials still supportive of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, began his two-day trip back to the US without confirming a deal that the White House has pushed hard for — but which high-level officials in Zelensky’s government view as a shakedown.

“Any deal that can be made has to be mutually beneficial,” a spokesperson for the Ukrainian president’s office insisted to The Post.

But shortly after, Trump announced at the White House that the US and Ukraine were “signing an agreement, hopefully in the next fairly short period of time.”

“It’s a big deal, but they want it, and it keeps us in that country, and they’re very happy about it,” Trump added later. “We get our money back. This should have been signed long before we went in. It should have been signed by [former President Joe] Biden.”

After a tense week of back-and-forth barbs between Washington and Kyiv, it was Kellogg’s visit Friday to wounded Ukrainian veterans at Irpin Military Hospital northwest of Kyiv that ingratiated the US to Zelensky, nudging the deal closer to the finish line, sources familiar with the situation told The Post.

Hours earlier, Kellogg had also broken from the rest of the administration in lauding Zelensky publicly.

“A long and intense day with the senior leadership of Ukraine,” Kellogg wrote on his personal X account following a round of meetings Thursday. “Extensive and positive discussions with @ZelenskyyUa, the embattled and courageous leader of a nation at war and his talented national security team.”

Kellogg was the last White House official publicly scheduled to meet in person with the Ukrainian leader for the foreseeable future, after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent failed to secure a similar deal that reportedly included no security guarantees for Ukraine.

“It sounds like there’s been some positive movement in the negotiations over the past couple days, and I expect the two sides will likely end up reaching a deal,” Foundation for Defense of Democracies Russia Program director John Hardie told The Post.

“In principle, US-Ukraine cooperation on Ukraine’s natural resources, including its critical minerals, is a great idea. But any agreement should be mutually beneficial.”

“They remain a key ally for us to save the state. And we risk losing this partnership. And this, in turn, will significantly complicate Ukraine’s position in the war with Russia,” he wrote. “… This altercation [with Trump] is definitely not in Ukraine’s favor, no matter how eloquent the arguments are.”

Poroshenko, who is likely to run against Zelensky in Ukraine’s next presidential election, said the leader should bite his tongue instead of responding publicly to every verbal punch Trump throws at him.

“A discussion with Trump requires diplomatic skill, patience and silence, sufficient not to reflect on his every statement,” he said. “I worked with him for three years and know what I’m talking about.”

“The authorities should work on the mistakes and figure out [who failed] in building relations with the new American administration. Who, instead of building bridges, burned them? Now the government’s problems in communication with Washington have become a problem for our entire country.”

But other Ukrainians told The Post that they feel Zelensky should not capitulate to Trump.

Ukrainian Financial Forum founder and political analyst Roman Motychak told The Post that it’s the American president who should reverse course, not Zelensky.

“If the state of affairs [described] is correct, it’s a very narrow-minded and almost childish approach. This will backfire,” he said. “If this administration will push for this ‘deal,‘ it will be seen in the upcoming generations as marauding.”

“… If the US wants to have Ukrainians as enemies for generations to come, the US will proceed with browbeating Ukrainians into this ‘deal.’”

Ukrainians have ample historical reason to be apprehensive of such an arrangement with the US. In 1994, then-Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Guarantees at the US and United Kingdom’s behest.

The arrangement held that Kyiv would give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for promises that Russia, the US and UK would be prohibited from threatening or using military or economic coercion against Ukraine “except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.”

In 2014, Moscow reneged on its end of the deal when it initially invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea a full decade before launching it’s full-scale invasion on Feb. 24, 2022.

“If Trump is Obama/Biden 2.0, Zelensky is not Kravchuk 2.0,” Motychak said. “Kravchuk [was] browbeat by the US to sign [the] Budapest memorandum.”

Local businessman Volodymyr Pimienov told The Post he wanted Trump supporters to understand “how much the [nuclear] weapons given to the signatories of the Budapest Memorandum cost.”

“It’s more than $500 billion,” he said. “We gave up everything for the sake of peace. But those who made agreements did so in the wrong direction.”

A Ukrainian policy expert currently serving in the Ukrainian Armed Forces suggested that the White House should reveal the full terms of the deal to the public to try and whip up support.

“I believe Zelensky is scared of the prospect of signing anything unpopular that minimizes the chance of his reelection,” the person, who wished to remain anonymous, told The Post. “He’s aware that his opponents will definitely use it in campaigns slamming him as a traitor.”

“The sooner the White House reveals the terms of the agreement, the better. If terms are fair enough, Ukrainian public opinion will back the deal.”