The Failure of the Budapest Memorandum

Nuclear Device, courtesy of United States Action
Nuclear Device, courtesy of United States Action

If Ukraine had denied this diplomatic agreement, then Russia would have to face a Kiev government armed with nuclear devices. Thus, the situation in Crimea would require a more realpolitik view based on the strength of arms, both conventional and nuclear, rather than political good will enshrined in a treaty. As Pavlo Rizanenko, a member of the Ukrainian parliament, told USA Today, “We gave up nuclear weapons because of this agreement. Now there’s a strong sentiment in Ukraine that we made a big mistake.”
Walter Russell Mead of the American Interests wrote, “If Ukraine still had its nukes, it would probably still have Crimea. It gave up its nukes, got worthless paper guarantees, and also got an invasion from a more powerful and nuclear neighbour.”

The moral of the story is that tactical nuclear devices guarantee territorial sovereignty – a lesson the world, especially those threatened by conventional forces – such as Iran, would be wise to heed.

Zurcher, Anthony. “Ukraine’s Nuclear Regret?” BBC. March 20, 2014. http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-26676051

United States Action. “Special Atomic Demolition Munitions (SADMs).” http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/suitcase-nuclear.htm

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s