Last week, Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskyy made plain Ukraine’s post-war dilemma; “Either Ukraine will have nuclear weapons, and that will be our protection, or we should have some sort of alliance. Apart from NATO, today we do not know any effective alliances.” The comment served as a stark reminder that a cease-fire in the Russia-Ukraine War will only provide for a lasting peace if Ukrainian security is assured. That said, while the comments attracted attention, there is likely no reasonable path for Ukraine to re-establish its nuclear arsenal, and even if it were to do so, such an arsenal is no guarantor of Ukraine’s security.
Ukraine and Nuclear Weapons: Was That Ever Viable?
President Zelenskyy cited Ukraine’s decision to give up the nuclear arsenal that it had inherited from the Soviet Union as a critical cause of Ukraine’s insecurity today. However, despite the facile insistence of certain “pop realists,” holding onto a nuclear arsenal after independence was never a plausible option for Ukraine. Maintaining the nuclear force would have been inordinately expensive, would have poisoned relations with Russia, Europe, and the United States, would have undercut Ukraine’s economic recovery, and would have been enormously difficult from a technical perspective. A Ukraine that could barely pay for its own defense in 2014 is not a Ukraine that looks very secure with a nuclear arsenal.
That said, if Ukraine decided to “eat grass” it could probably build some kind of nuclear stockpile. As a highly educated country with a relatively large population, significant industry, and a history with nuclear technology, Ukraine could probably scrape together the materials and technical capacity necessary to construct weapons, although it would take some time and probably ruin Ukraine’s relationship with key partners in Europe and Asia. But this would not be the end of Ukraine’s problems; it might create a new, more dangerous set of troubles.
Why Nuclear Weapons?
The purpose of a nuclear arsenal is deterrence; the weapons are never supposed to be used as anything but a threat. And if Russia is not deterred? Nuclear weapons are not a geostrategic “get out of jail free” card, which immediately frightens the world into compliance. India and Pakistan have conducted military operations against one another despite having nuclear weapons; Russia and the United States have waged proxy wars against one another despite the presence of nuclear weapons; the United Kingdom and Israel have suffered conventional attacks from non-nuclear countries despite their nuclear arsenals. Given that a nuclear arsenal would make Ukraine more threatening to Russia, it might even increase Moscow’s incentive to launch conventional attacks. In such a case, Ukraine would need to decide whether saving territory was worth the potential for complete nuclear annihilation.
Ukraine would also need to make immense investments in delivery systems. For reasons of geography, ballistic missile submarines (the most survivable system of delivery) are impossible, meaning that Ukraine would need to rely on aircraft and ballistic missiles. Both would be deeply vulnerable to pre-emptive Russian attack, probably because they could not be regarded as representing a secure second-strike capability. Due to escalation concerns, Russia might not target Ukrainian nuclear installations or Ukrainian command and control systems at the onset of hostilities. Nevertheless, Ukraine would need to prepare for attacks on those installations and those systems, which would require the expenditure of vast sums that would restrict Ukraine’s capacity for defending itself from conventional attacks.
Nuclear weapons also do not spare Ukraine the kind of political and economic interference that Russia has engaged in over the past three decades. Nuclear threats can’t prevent the infiltration of Russian criminal networks into Ukraine or the subversion of Ukrainian religious institutions. They cannot avert Russian money from corrupting the Ukrainian political system or buying off key actors in border regions. They cannot prevent cyberattacks or the relentless streams of disinformation that Russia has rained upon the Ukrainian body politic.
What Happens Now?
President Zelenskyy has grown into an adept international statesman, and it is pretty likely that he is aware of all these problems. His statement should be taken as a rhetorical gesture, a reminder of what Ukraine has given up in the interests of world peace and the costs that Ukraine has been forced to pay.
The best guarantor of Ukraine’s future safety is either membership in NATO or a binding security agreement with the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, the mention of nukes serves to put an exclamation point on Ukraine’s quest for security, which the world will need to address if a lasting cease-fire is to be found.
About the Author: Dr. Robert Farley
Dr. Robert Farley has taught security and diplomacy courses at the Patterson School since 2005. He received his BS from the University of Oregon in 1997, and his Ph. D. from the University of Washington in 2004. Dr. Farley is the author of Grounded: The Case for Abolishing the United States Air Force (University Press of Kentucky, 2014), the Battleship Book (Wildside, 2016), Patents for Power: Intellectual Property Law and the Diffusion of Military Technology (University of Chicago, 2020), and most recently Waging War with Gold: National Security and the Finance Domain Across the Ages (Lynne Rienner, 2023). He has contributed extensively to a number of journals and magazines, including the National Interest, the Diplomat: APAC, World Politics Review, and the American Prospect. Dr. Farley is also a founder and senior editor of Lawyers, Guns and Money.
JingleBells
October 18, 2024 at 5:14 pm
Zelenskyy is mentally unstable and his mind is of a type very similar or exactly the same as the one belonging to joe the outgoing US president.
Joe thinks it’s his destiny to change the world, through his violent proxy wars and bloody regime change for as long as it takes.
Zelenskyy thinks it is his personal destiny to defeat russia and bring glory to ukraine through NATO weapons or through nuclear arms.
Thus today we have 2 mentally unstable leaders very eager to welcome wholesale death & destruction, by waging wars and winning them.
We need to send both of them to the dustbin of history.
pagar
October 18, 2024 at 6:22 pm
Zelenskyy’s ‘Victory Plan’ presented to the big NATO conglomerate this month, consisted of 5 main points and 3 secret points, one secret point being about nuclear weaponry.
According to zelenskyy, ukraine must have long-range weapons now, or else kyiv needs to access the nuke alternative.
It’s an ultimatum, even an outright blackmail.
But will joe biden accede to his demand. Will biden give zelenskyy what he wants.
Or is biden fully ready to witness a nuke exchange in europe taking place after what has happened in washington DC when pelosi unceremoniously pulled the rug from right under his feet.
So, Biden. What’s on your mind today. What’s scholz whispering in your ear today.
Commentar
October 19, 2024 at 11:00 am
Ukraine is signalling that it MAY quickly develop its own tactical nukes if abandoned by joe biden and NATO.
But that could be exactly what joe has in mind for the Ukraine conflict.
Uncle sam, or washington, or the democrat woke-liberal party organization, likes to demolish geopolitical rivals by employing proxies to fight them.
Ukraine is rather a very most suitable proxy, as it has the materials, the brains and vast experience in operating several nuclear power plants good enough to whip up some tactical nukes to demolish russia.
(Another suitable proxy is japan which today has about 8 to 10 tons of plutonium kept on home soil.)
So, a lot of things now depend on What joe secretly plans for the world and the whole of humankind.
The fate of the world today lies in the palms of joe (or dark brandon).
Chris Cha
October 20, 2024 at 10:48 pm
Ukraine was naive and foolish to give up its nukes, trusting other countries to provide for its defense. Both countries – Russia and the United States – failed to keep their end of the “agreement” (not a treaty).
PseudoExpertent
October 20, 2024 at 11:16 pm
There are over 400 nuclear power plants in operation around the world producing plutoniun 239 as a byproduct.
The plutonium byproduct can then be surrepticiously alloyed with another substance like gallium to become a super alloy that’s easily pressed or formed into an object.
That would then be used to form the core of a basic A-bomb type of nuclear weapon.
The core is later activated by a chemically-induced explosion such as tnt.
That was the nuke used on nagasaki in august 1945.
In august 1949, or just 4 years after nagasaki, the USSR successfully tested its very first plutonium device, as a result of information obtained from the nagasaki weapon.
Carl A Elwell
October 21, 2024 at 1:04 am
Dr. Farley, Ukraine has access to plutonium, all that’s needed is the brains to figure out the compression math to implode the fissionable material and meld it to a beaver, point to Moscow and St. Petersburg…wake tfu you moron.
HAT451
October 21, 2024 at 12:37 pm
The easiest and fastest to construct would be a dirty bomb. That is nothing more than a conventional bomb dispersing radioactive material.
Given that Ukraine still has several nuclear power plants, it does have the nuclear waste material. Likewise it also has the technical knowhow with it’s organic drone programs to build a delivery platform. Something like that can be assembled at one of the current operating power plants.
Depending on where and how this “package” is delivered, it could be tactical “nothing burger” to denial of terrain, logistics, long term health costs, or death.
Regardless, it will be psychologically significant all participants in the current conflict, including those countries supporting the combatants logistically.
One-World-Order
October 22, 2024 at 4:51 am
Ukraine is living on borrowed time – the western nations fully know that the so-called Victory Plan is similar to the german plan for victory using wunderwaffe during the closing stages of ww2.
Thus zelenskyy is clutching at straws, so, nukes a one final possibility.
But even making a makeshift nuke takes time, and Ukraine is now running out of time.
So the only alternative is to sue for peace, better do it now, before donald takes over from brandon biden.
Pingback: What if Ukraine Had Kept Its Nuclear Weapons? - NationalSecurityJournal
Pingback: Ukrainian Nukes? - Lawyers, Guns & Money