M A Hossain,
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has once again lamented Ukraine’s lack of nuclear weapons, arguing that their absence leaves the country vulnerable to Russian aggression. In a candid interview with US podcaster Lex Fridman on January 5, Zelensky aired his frustrations over what he perceives as the failure of Western security guarantors to uphold their commitments to Ukraine under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. His remarks have reignited debates over nuclear disarmament, security guarantees, and the role of Western allies in Ukraine’s ongoing conflict with Russia.
The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed in 1994, was a pivotal agreement in the post-Cold War era. It saw Ukraine relinquish its inherited nuclear arsenal-the third-largest in the world at the time-in exchange for assurances from Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom that its sovereignty and territorial integrity would be respected. This disarmament was hailed as a triumph of diplomacy and non-proliferation, but Zelensky’s recent remarks suggest that Ukraine has come to view the memorandum as a grave mistake.
“Ukraine had security guarantees,” Zelensky emphasized in the interview. “The Budapest Memorandum, nuclear weapons-this is what we had. Today, the fact that we do not have them is bad.” He expressed frustration that these guarantees failed to prevent Russia from annexing Crimea in 2014 and from launching its broader military offensive in 2022.
Zelensky’s criticism was not limited to Moscow. He accused the US, UK, and other nuclear powers of ignoring Ukraine’s repeated pleas for stronger support. Speaking bluntly in Russian-a language he has largely avoided during his presidency-he declared, “They didn’t give a f**k… None of them gave a f**k about this country, these people, these security guarantees.” This pointed language underscores Zelensky’s deep frustration with what he perceives as the West’s failure to fulfill its obligations.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Ukraine inherited approximately 1,700 nuclear warheads, technically making it a nuclear power. However, operational control over these weapons remained with Moscow, and the nascent Ukrainian government lacked the infrastructure and expertise to maintain them independently. Under intense international pressure-particularly from the United States-Ukraine agreed to surrender its nuclear arsenal, receiving assurances of protection in return.
At the time, the decision was seen as pragmatic, avoiding the risks associated with nuclear proliferation. However, Zelensky and other Ukrainian leaders have increasingly questioned the wisdom of that decision. In early 2022, Zelensky argued that Ukraine had “every right” to revisit its disarmament, given Russia’s actions and the West’s perceived inaction.
Moscow has consistently dismissed Ukraine’s claims about the Budapest Memorandum, asserting that Ukraine never truly “owned” the nuclear weapons stationed on its territory. Russian officials argue that these were Soviet assets legally belonging to Russia. They also contend that the memorandum was rendered moot by NATO’s eastward expansion, which they claim threatens Russia’s vital security interests.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly accused the US of undermining the memorandum by orchestrating the 2014 Maidan coup, which ousted Ukraine’s pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych. According to Moscow, this event marked a significant breach of the agreement, justifying its subsequent actions in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.
During the interview, Fridman suggested a “dream” scenario in which Zelensky, Putin, and US President-elect Donald Trump could meet to negotiate peace. Zelensky responded by stressing the importance of effective security guarantees for Ukraine. He argued that possessing nuclear weapons would have deterred Russian aggression, even if Ukraine never intended to use them.
“Ukraine used them [nuclear weapons] for protection,” Zelensky said. “This doesn’t mean that someone attacked us… These were our security guarantees.” His remarks highlight the stark contrast between Ukraine’s past as a nuclear-armed state and its current reliance on Western military aid and diplomatic support.
Zelensky’s harsh critique of the West raises questions about the effectiveness of international security agreements and the role of nuclear deterrence in modern geopolitics. While the US and its allies have provided substantial military and financial support to Ukraine since the onset of the conflict, Zelensky’s comments suggest that this assistance falls short of the assurances promised in 1994.
The debate over Ukraine’s nuclear disarmament also has broader implications for global non-proliferation efforts. Countries like North Korea and Iran closely monitor Ukraine’s predicament, using it as a cautionary tale against surrendering their nuclear ambitions. If the international community fails to uphold its commitments to Ukraine, it could undermine trust in similar agreements in the future.
As the conflict in Ukraine drags on, Zelensky faces the daunting task of securing more robust security guarantees. His options, as he outlined in October, appear limited: either Ukraine joins NATO, or it regains nuclear capabilities. Both paths are fraught with challenges. NATO membership remains unlikely in the near term, given the alliance’s hesitance to escalate its confrontation with Russia. Meanwhile, pursuing nuclear rearmament would violate international treaties and risk further isolating Ukraine diplomatically.
For now, Zelensky’s strategy hinges on rallying international support and maintaining pressure on Russia through sanctions and military aid. However, his recent remarks suggest that he remains deeply skeptical of the West’s long-term commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and security.
Zelensky’s reflections on Ukraine’s nuclear past reveal a profound sense of regret and betrayal. His criticism of Western security guarantors underscores the challenges of relying on international agreements in an era of shifting geopolitical alliances. As Ukraine continues to fight for its survival, the lessons of the Budapest Memorandum serve as a stark reminder of the complexities and consequences of disarmament and diplomacy. Whether the West can regain Zelensky’s trust and provide the assurances Ukraine seeks remains an open question, with far-reaching implications for global security.
This article published at :
1. Minute Mirror, Pak : 11 Jan, 25
2. Weekly Blitz, BD : 07 Jan, 25
No comments:
Post a Comment