

The headline is not editorialised, BBC is weird with this, I didn’t notice, sorry, thanks for pointing it out.
Look the article up in their search: https://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=visszanyal+a+fagyi&d=NEWS_PS
Or look at the title bar of your browser when opening it. Lemmy retrieved this one automatically. I’ll add an edit to clarify.
Apples and oranges.
The US minerals deal was “give us all your minerals, we will build our own mines on them that will not be subject to your own country’s laws. You may keep some of the proceeds.”
The EU minerals deal was “we will give you money and know-how to build your own mines, in exchange for long-term supply agreements. The resources and the mines will remain yours.”
The difference is the one between someone extorting you to become an indentured taxi driver, and someone offering you a car in exchange for driving them to the airport once in a while. EU support was also not contingent on the deal, while it was made apparent that US support was.
That was indeed bad wording, I apologise. What I meant was that the EU would gain strategic depth and more advantageous launch site arrangements for missile warfare and whatnot, which would be useful for deterrence. I am from the Eastern periphery as well, and TBH I feel that there indeed is a first/second class EU citizen divide mainly along whether your country joined before or after 2004 (which would make me a second class citizen), but I feel that that particular division is getting less pronounced.