Why the United States Cannot Supply Nuclear Weapons to Ukraine

The ongoing tension between Ukraine and Russia has led to discussions about the potential role of nuclear weapons in deterring a possible Russian invasion. However, the U.S. and NATO states have made it abundantly clear that they will not provide nuclear weapons to Ukraine. This decision is rooted in several critical factors, including strategic considerations, international treaties, and the overarching goal of global security.

Strategic Considerations

The first and most immediate reason for not moving nuclear weapons closer to Ukraine is the inherent risk involved. Even a na?ve adversary like Russia would understand that any use of nuclear weapons would escalate the conflict into a full-scale World War Three, resulting in catastrophic consequences for all involved.

Moreover, the U.S. already has a significant nuclear arsenal that can be delivered within 20 to 45 minutes. This proximity means that no nuclear weapons need to be stationed in Ukraine to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent. The U.S. and its European allies have been providing non-nuclear weapons to Ukraine, which are outdated and no longer in use in their own countries.

Legal and Treaty Obligations

The United States is a signatory to the

The Role of NATO

The situation is further complicated by Ukraine’s non-NATO membership. According to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Pact (NPP), only NATO countries such as Turkey, Belgium, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands have been supplied with nuclear weapons. These weapons are provided under a "loan" arrangement, meaning they are not considered fully owned or controlled by the recipient state.

Ukraine, as a non-NATO member, is explicitly prohibited from receiving nuclear weapons under the NPP. However, it's important to note that Ukraine has its own nuclear expertise. Even though Ukraine is no longer a nuclear-weapon state, the fissile material and expertise to develop nuclear weapons remain within the country. They could potentially develop nuclear weapons, but this would require withdrawing from the NPP.

Conclusion

It is clear that supplying nuclear weapons to Ukraine is both strategically unsound and legally problematic. The U.S. and other NATO countries must adhere to their international obligations and continue to support Ukraine in non-nuclear ways that do not escalate the conflict to a catastrophic global level. The security of the world depends on maintaining a balance of power and avoiding the use of nuclear weapons.