By Peter Huessey, Warrior Senior Nuclear Weapons Expert
According to the New Yok Times, western European sources believe the United States could
consider giving nuclear weapons to Ukraine. The idea that the United States should even
consider sending nuclear weapons of some sort to Ukraine is absurd. Such a transfer would not change the balance of power in the region or further deter Russia from seeking to use nuclear
weapons against Ukraine any more than some 1550-2000 nuclear warheads now in the US
deployed arsenal.
Moscow has already threatened to use nuclear weapons some multiple dozens of times over the past three years. Whether the US thinks such threats are serious or bluff, the United States must do whatever necessary to sustain and improve its nuclear and conventional deterrent against such possible Russian aggression. Not taking such threats seriously is not an option as complacently or weakness only invites an attack.
And we will only know that Putin is not bluffing when a Russian nuclear weapons goes off on
our doorstep and then it will be too late to improve the deterrent, we assume is sufficient to now stop any such reckless decision by Moscow.
The story from the New York Times is, however, also totally irresponsible. It sounds like a
disinformation story fed to the Times indirectly from Moscow as part of a strategy of deception, coming from a third party the Times would take seriously. However, the idea that the Biden administration would even consider sending nuclear weapons to Ukraine makes no sense and any ally of the United States would understand that. If there is one thing the Biden administration understands it is what is and what is not allowed by such agreements as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and other requirements re proliferation.
Totally, completely 1000% the story is disinformation.
There is also a serious downside to such reporting. The Times has now placed the onus on the
old and new Administration to now have to prove a negative—to explain to Moscow that the
United States would never consider or discuss or have plans to send nuclear weapons of any kind
to Ukraine. Unlike of course Moscow’s genuine threat to send nuclear weapons to Belarus which was announced publicly.
And the only theater nuclear weapons the United States has are gravity bombs in Europe and that would require the US to also send to Ukraine the airplanes to carry the bombs into Russian
territory—to say nothing about training Ukraine pilots to fly the advanced jet fighter planes and in a nuclear mode. The current theater nuclear deterrent is already in Europe and whatever
nuclear deterrent effect the deterrent has will not be improved by moving the force to Ukraine
proper where it will immediately become a target for destruction.
Alternatively, giving Ukraine a strategic deterrent such as an ICBM would be equally without
effect as an ICBM such as a MMIII has a range which if launched from Ukraine would overfly
all of Russian territory and if launched over the pole would land somewhere in the United States
or Canada.
However, complicating matters is President Zelenski of Ukraine threatening to go nuclear unless
Ukraine is granted membership in NATO. The idea is simple: Ukraine in 1994 gave up its
nuclear weapons in return for USA and British security guarantees. There was however no
explicit pledge to make Ukraine a member of NATO but the logic was clear—join NATO and
forgo any need for nuclear weapons in Ukraine, as the US would provide the extended nuclear
umbrella.
However, Zelensky now wants nuclear weapons but he must think the USA security pledge is
going away or NATO membership is less likely. So, Ukraine thinks Zelenski needs nukes to
make up the difference.
But given USA assistance continues, Zelensky is getting ahead of himself. Such threats will not
make Congress any more eager to aid Ukraine, especially without some genuinely realistic plan to win the war and kick Russia out of Ukraine territory. Which probably entails highly advanced
conventional forces and permission to strike targets even deeper into Russia.
Nonetheless, the extended nuclear deterrent the United States now deploys can be made better and more credible. But proliferating nuclear forces so that Ukraine becomes a nuclear armed
states makes no sense.
test.
Peter Huessy, Senior Nuclear Expert, Maven Warrior
Senior Fellow, NIDS
President, Geo-Strategic Analysis.
