undefined

points

[-]

I think Ukraine would have no problem maintaining it's own nuclear program from purely technical perspective, considering they have a number of nuclear plants and expertise. Plutonium is a byproduct of a nuclear plant, they wouldn't even have to bother with uranium enrichment.

by danny_codes8 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Presumably if you kept your nukes you’d built that capacity

by etc-hosts8 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

That takes money. Ukraine was very poor in 1993. It's even poorer now.

by Svoka8 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

What an awful take devoid of context. Russia literally defaulted in 1998, and 'somehow' kept the nukes.

And today Ukraine is doing quite amazing, considering 12 years of war. I can only dream what it would be if russians didn't steal a generation. Giving up nukes was a giant mistake.

Back then, giving up on nukes never was about compromising security. In 1993, I remember being full of hope and opportunity to live in peaceful world with less nukes. It felt like we had our backs by France, UK and USA. That was a move full of betrayed optimism, not desperation - giving up third world arsenal because the future is bright.

by Saline95154 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

You also need to maintain vectors, at least functioning ICBMs, which cost quite dearly. And Russia had much more ressources than Ukraine at the time, by the way.

by Svoka3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Ukraine absolutely had fleet of functioning ICBMs and strategic bombers. Unlike russia, Ukraine didn't declare bankruptcy.

And pretty sure people who built those ICBMs and strategic bombers would have no issue maintaining them.

USA didn't pressure Ukraine into giving up nukes, at the same time bankrolling russian nuclear program for 'security' reasons.

by Saline95153 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Ukraine didn't declare bankruptcy because Russia chose to assume 100% of the USSR external debt. Meanwhile, in 1998, Russia had a GDP PPP 80% higher than Ukraine.

by Svoka2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

This is why usa had to bankroll russki nuclear security program?

by Saline95152 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

It was a non-proliferation issue, I believe? The same could have been said about the pressure for Ukrainians to renounce the nukes. I agree that in retrospect Ukraine would have been safer with nuclear weapons.

However, a lot could have happened in two decades, and Ukraine had to go through many issues typical of post-Soviet countries at the time. The risk associated with warheads being sold by generals or oligarchs was seen as a real one, see for instance:

https://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997-09/press-releases/russi...