What Nuclear States Can Do with a Non-Nuclear One. A Cautionary Tale from the Disarmed Ukraine, Which Was Not Given Sufficient Security Guarantees, for All Countries of the World
Russia is threatening to carry out a nuclear strike on Ukraine. Russian President Putin tested a carrier missile designed to carry a nuclear charge during an attack on Ukraine.
And the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, preaches a doctrine in which Christians should not fear nuclear weapons or the "end of the world" and should be "warriors in the hands of the Lord."
The "Right" of Nuclear States to Wage War Equals the Powerlessness and Vulnerability of Non-Nuclear Ones
I write these lines with the hope that they will be read by people living in parts of our planet that are neither protected by nuclear weapons from the invasion of a nuclear-armed state nor shielded by NATO's collective defense system. Let the example of my native Ukraine, which was disarmed and gave up its nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees (security assurances) from nuclear powers, serve as a lesson to you. Russia provides a clear example of an attack and large-scale war by a nuclear-armed state against a non-nuclear one. Moreover, the Kremlin has already enlisted its allies and supporters, who also possess nuclear weapons and nuclear technologies, in this war against a non-nuclear state. This is a troubling signal for the rest of the world.
Budapest Memorandum
This document was signed by Ukraine, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom in 1994, in exchange for Ukraine transferring its nuclear weapons, including tactical ones, to Russia. Specifically, the document states the following:
"Refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the signatories to the memorandum and undertake that none of their weapons will ever be used against these countries, except in cases of self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations."
How naïve were the Ukrainian politicians at the time who agreed to the terms of such a poorly constructed and worded Memorandum, which placed no obligations on the countries providing guarantees-or "assurances," as it is phrased in the English version of the document. They exchanged the best guarantee of their own security for a two-page piece of paper signed by the leaders of Ukraine-Leonid Kuchma, Russia-Boris Yeltsin, the United States-Bill Clinton, and the United Kingdom-John Major. This was the achievement of those politicians who, at any cost, sought to reduce the number of nuclear-armed states on the world map. But this document turned out to be a kind of time bomb planted under the very existence of the Ukrainian state. This was recognized not long ago by one of the signatories of the Memorandum: the 42nd President of the United States, Bill Clinton, who expressed regret for being among those who pressured Ukraine into disarmament. Here is a direct quote from U.S. President Bill Clinton:
This Is How Compromises with Nuclear States "Work'"
The nuclear state of Russia, which, according to the text of the Budapest Memorandum, provided Ukraine with "guarantees" (specifically, the word "guarantees" in the Russian-language version of the Memorandum) of territorial integrity and political independence, occupied Crimea in 2014. Citizens and politicians of non-nuclear countries around the world should harbor no illusions that painful compromises can enable a non-nuclear state to stop war and aggression from a nuclear one.
In 2014, the idea-popular even among NATO country politicians-that Ukraine should not mount significant resistance to the Russian invasion gained traction. These naïve and unrealistic individuals imagined that once Crimea was seized, Putin would halt his forces. Within this framework, Ukraine offered practically no armed resistance to Russia's occupation of the Crimean Peninsula. However, such a swift success in war only emboldened Putin, leading to further large-scale escalation and the occupation of additional Ukrainian territories in the north, east, and south of the country. By March 2022, Russian troops had reached Ukraine's capital. It was only through organized armed resistance that Ukraine was able to push them back from the country's political center, preserving Ukrainian statehood.
If the world continues to cling to the illusion that concessions to a country like Russia are the primary means of influencing it, this will signify a failure to learn lessons not only from the Munich Agreement of 1938, signed with Hitler regarding Czechoslovakia, but also from more recent history-the occupation of Ukrainian territories by Russia.
Two Nuclear States (Russia and North Korea), a Virtually Nuclear Iran, with the De Facto Political Support of Nuclear China – Against Non-Nuclear Ukraine. How Do You Like a Setup Like That?
Today, non-nuclear Ukraine is under attack and facing an invasion not only from nuclear-armed Russia, which, during Ukraine's disarmament, acted as a guarantor of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity. Putin, understanding that Russia cannot defeat Ukrainians in direct military confrontations between the armies of the two countries, has brought another nuclear state into the war against Ukraine: North Korea.
Moreover, Russia is receiving military assistance from Iran, which is developing nuclear weapons and possesses atomic technologies. Iran supplies Russia not only with Shahed-type attack drones used to strike Ukraine but also with the technology to produce them. This has enabled Russia to establish mass production of these weapons of war.
Yet, this is not an exhaustive list of the alliances Russia has formed. The People's Republic of China politically supports Russia, effectively granting it a "Chinese carte blanche" for the war against Ukraine. China regularly and openly endorses Russian "policies"; Chinese and Russian leaders meet frequently, and the foreign ministries of both countries emphasize the friendly nature of these meetings. Meanwhile, Russian and Chinese military forces regularly conduct joint exercises.
So, what kind of picture do we see today? Essentially, three nuclear countries have united in a war against non-nuclear Ukraine, while a fourth nuclear giant provides political support to the aggressor state, Russia. Is this how nuclear states should behave?
Ukraine's Experience as a Warning to the Rest of the World
Disarmed through the joint efforts of Russia and the leaders of the Western world, Ukraine should serve as a warning to the rest of the non-nuclear states worldwide. First, you are not guaranteed protection from being attacked by a nuclear state. Second, assistance from partner countries-if you are not part of a collective security arrangement-will be measured and cautious, designed not to provoke the leader of the state that has attacked you because they have nuclear weapons, and you do not.
Credit must be given, and gratitude extended, to the countries that have been providing aid and supporting Ukraine in this horrific, unprovoked war-a war that threatens the very existence of a multi-million-strong nation in Eastern Europe. A huge thank you goes to all the countries that have offered their help to Ukraine. However, it is also essential to understand that these resources and support are insufficient in a war against an aggressor who, since 2000 (Putin's rise to power), has systematically prepared his army and people for war, while Ukraine was left technically disarmed and not provided with sufficient security guarantees.
Thus, Ukraine's example should serve as a warning signal for other nations and peoples, especially those not under the umbrella of a shared security system with other countries. Your strength and the best guarantees lie within yourselves. No nuclear state will ensure your safety. Countries like Russia, North Korea, Iran, and even China-which collaborates with the aggressor state, blocks UN Security Council resolutions condemning Russian aggression, and supports Russian militarists through joint military exercises-can become threats to the very existence of your state.
When developing your country's defense and protection strategies, it is vital to understand and take this into account. Your stance determines your nation's defense policies and the availability of protective measures should someone decide to erase you from the world map. Make decisions that will safeguard you in this unstable world prone to widespread violence and war. The grotesque empires of the past-like massive reptiles devouring new territories and feeding on human flesh-have not vanished from the face of the Earth. They still crave more territories and more sustenance from human flesh and blood.
Блог автора – матеріал, який відображає винятково точку зору автора. Текст блогу не претендує на об'єктивність та всебічність висвітлення теми, яка у ньому піднімається. Редакція "Української правди" не відповідає за достовірність та тлумачення наведеної інформації і виконує винятково роль носія. Точка зору редакції УП може не збігатися з точкою зору автора блогу.
