As Kiev faces dwindling manpower and equipment, the only sure way to prevent Ukraine’s destruction is to join NATO. Beyond that, there’s only one option left: developing Ukraine’s nuclear arsenal and restoring the role of a nuclear power it relinquished thirty years ago
It’s pretty clear that US President-elect Donald Trump won’t be nearly as supportive of Ukraine in the fight against Russia as the Joe Biden administration has been. Moreover, he could abandon it altogether. Such a possibility is already worrying Ukrainians, who will be forced to seek other kinds of aid and consider a possible nuclear solution that has only been hinted at so far, Foreign Policy writes. Last month, Ukrainian President Zelensky outlined the possible outcomes of the war. “Either Ukraine will have nuclear weapons and this will be our defense, or we must have some kind of alliance. Apart from NATO, today we do not know of any effective alliance,” he said.
NUCLEAR ARSENAL DEVELOPMENT
It was the first time that the Ukrainian president had revealed the outcome that seems increasingly inevitable. As Kiev faces dwindling manpower and equipment, the only sure way to prevent Ukraine’s destruction is NATO membership. Apart from that, there is only one option left: developing Ukraine’s nuclear arsenal and restoring the role of a nuclear power it gave up thirty years ago. For the West, Zelensky’s words may be shocking, but for anyone paying attention to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s plans, the idea that Kiev might pursue its own nuclear arsenal is not at all surprising. Perhaps Zelensky is revisiting an important part of Ukraine’s history that many in the West seem to have forgotten, but for which the West bears considerable responsibility.
THE U.S. “RED LIGHT”
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine emerged as one of a handful of countries seeking a share of the Soviet nuclear arsenal. And almost immediately, the United States and Russia made a joint effort to strip Ukraine of its new weapons, succeeding in 1994 through the now-infamous Budapest Memorandum. Washington was immensely proud of that move, which ultimately set the stage for Russia’s subsequent invasion of Ukraine.
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991—aided by Ukrainian anti-colonial efforts to achieve independence—the Soviet nuclear arsenal was divided among several new nations, including Ukraine. And almost immediately, U.S. officials decided that Kiev could not and should not be trusted to keep its nuclear arsenal. The George HW Bush and Bill Clinton administrations assured Russia that Moscow could retain its status as a nuclear power. Countries like Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine would have to give up their post-Soviet nuclear arsenals.
THE WEST’S DILEMMA
Now, as Zelensky made clear, that bill is coming, and the West now faces the option of either eventually admitting Ukraine into NATO or risking becoming a nuclear power again. Ukraine has the history, the technical know-how, and the experience to develop its own nuclear arsenal. If a nation like North Korea, now participating in the Russian invasion of Ukraine, can develop its own nuclear systems, then a country like Ukraine should do so much more easily. If NATO continues to close the door on Ukrainian membership, then a nuclear Kiev would be the only alternative.
Around the same time that the United States was pressuring Ukraine to give up its nuclear weapons, Polish officials were making noise about quickly launching their own domestic nuclear program, despite U.S. wishes. NATO expanded to Poland in 1999, eliminating the need for a Polish nuclear arsenal. But Ukraine no longer has time to wait for NATO membership. It is becoming increasingly clear that the West must either admit Ukraine into NATO or begin preparing for Ukraine to become a nuclear power again.
