A landmark resources deal between the U.S. and Ukraine is expected to lay the ground for further so-called “minerals for muscle” agreements.

Washington and Kyiv signed a highly anticipated minerals deal earlier this month. The agreement, which has since been ratified by Ukrainian lawmakers, is designed to deepen economic ties, bolster Ukraine’s reconstruction and position the country as a supplier of strategically important minerals to the U.S.

Long coveted by U.S. President Donald Trump, the partnership followed months of tense negotiations and came more than three years since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Ro Dhawan, CEO of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), a trade body representing roughly one-third of the global industry, said the U.S.-Ukraine deal is not the first and certainly won’t be the last bilateral agreement where minerals and geopolitics mix so closely.

“I think we’re likely to see more outreach to producer countries to make deals which could take the form of what I have previously called ‘minerals for muscle.’ So, ‘give me your minerals and I’ll give you security,’ or other forms of trade agreement,” Dhawan told CNBC by video call.

For instance, ICMM’s Dhawan said he could “absolutely imagine” a deal between the U.S. and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which has the world’s largest reserves of cobalt, in the near future.

Natural resources could also play a pivotal role in the thawing of “pretty frosty” diplomatic ties between the U.S. and South Africa, Dhawan said, as well as the U.S. and Canada.

“We’re at a turning point in the way minerals are a part of the global conversation. We’ve seen the first act, probably, with Ukraine, and I think there are a few more twists and turns to come in the way that this now starts to take shape,” he added.

Critical minerals refer to a subset of materials considered essential to the energy transition. These minerals, which tend to have a high risk of supply chain disruption, include metals such as copper, lithium, nickel, cobalt and rare earth elements.

China is the undisputed leader of the critical minerals supply chain, accounting for roughly 60% of the world’s production of rare earth minerals and materials. U.S. officials have previously warned that this poses a strategic challenge amid the pivot to low-carbon energy sources.

Heidi Crebo-Rediker, a senior fellow in the Center for Geoeconomic Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, a U.S. think tank, said Washington and Beijing’s geopolitical rivalry has put critical minerals at the center of the U.S. national security agenda.

Assuming they are commercially recoverable, Crebo-Rediker said Ukraine’s vast reserves of critical minerals and rare earth elements could “provide a future potential secure supply chain of many materials the United States needs.”

Timothy Puko, director of commodities at Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy, said he was “a little bit skeptical” about the prospect of a wave of bilateral “minerals for muscle” agreements.

“There’s certainly some truth to it. I think that’s what you’re seeing in Ukraine. I think that Kinshasa is very clearly trying to pursue that right now, with their cobalt-copper situation and the [Rwandan-backed] M23 rebels,” Puko told CNBC by video call.

Aside from Ukraine and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, however, Puko said he was “hard-pressed” to foresee any further agreements. Canada, Australia, Indonesia and several mineral-rich Latin America countries would all be unlikely to pursue minerals for muscle-type deals with the U.S., he added.

“Outside of Ukraine and DRC, and possibly not even DRC, no other country right now really wants to trade away all that midstream business. Resource nationalism is the name of the game right now and the trend is really the opposite,” Puko said.

“There’s definitely horse-trading to be done here. It’s a huge geopolitical issue. I’m sure it’s coming up right now in the ongoing bilateral trade talks but there are huge barriers to replicating what Ukraine is trying to do with a lot of other countries.”

Trump’s trade tariff policy and repeated calls to make Canada the 51st state has strained diplomatic ties between the neighboring countries and fueled a swell of national pride and anger at the U.S.

Newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney told Trump at the White House earlier this month that his country is “not for sale” — and “won’t be for sale ever.”

Trump replied: “Never say never.”

Heather Exner-Pirot, director of energy, natural resources and environment at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, a public policy think tank based in Ottawa, said Canada does not need a minerals for muscle agreement with the U.S.

“What we need is more certainty in our trade relationship. That is the biggest hurdle right now to reshoring mineral production and processing to North America in order to combat Chinese manipulation of global mineral markets,” Exner-Pirot told CNBC via email.

Canada and the U.S. have developed interdependently over the course of 150 years and through world wars, Exner-Pirot said, noting that the countries are each another’s largest suppliers and destinations of mineral exports.

What’s more, Exner-Pirot said Canada and the U.S. already collaborate in both NATO and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). A binational organization between Canada and the U.S., NORAD is primarily responsible for aerospace control and maritime warning in the defense of North America.