Ukraine's nuclear ambitions: Fact or fiction?
Could Ukraine create its own atomic bomb? Speculations arise almost every time the situation on the front lines worsens and negotiations for NATO membership reach a standstill. In theory, it's possible, but in practice, it's a stretch of the imagination.
The Times reported in mid-November that "Kyiv could quickly develop a primitive bomb, similar to the one dropped on Nagasaki in 1945, to deter Russia if the United States cuts off military aid."
The British newspaper based its claims on conclusions drawn by Oleksiy Izhak, head of the analysis department at Ukraine's National Institute for Strategic Studies, though Izhak was actually discussing the challenges and possible consequences of a hypothetical restoration of Ukraine's nuclear weapons program.
A few days later, The New York Times reported sensational information citing anonymous sources in the White House, suggesting that before the end of his term, Joe Biden would want to provide Ukraine with nuclear weapons. Jake Sullivan, the US National Security Advisor, quickly denied these reports.
Both publications and the ensuing reactions coincided with Vladimir Putin's announcement on November 19 of an updated nuclear doctrine in Russia.
The doctrine expands the criteria for nuclear weapon use. Under the new version, atomic weapons could be used in response to attacks from non-nuclear states (such as Ukraine) supported by nuclear powers, or in response to significant attacks using conventional weapons, like drones or hypersonic weapons. It specifically highlighted the possibility of responding to threats against the territorial integrity of Russia or its allies, including Belarus.
Kyiv has strongly distanced itself from speculations about rebuilding its nuclear potential. "Ukraine does not intend to create nuclear weapons and will adhere to the provisions of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons," wrote Foreign Ministry spokesman Heorhiy Tykhyi on Telegram.
Ukrainian nuclear weapons
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine inherited over 2,500 tactical nuclear weapons and 176 intercontinental ballistic missiles (130 UR-100N ballistic missiles, each capable of carrying six warheads, and 46 RT-23 missiles with 10 warheads each). Kyiv also had 38 heavy strategic bombers.
At that time, Ukraine held the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world. Due to its uncertain political situation, the West insisted on dismantling this arsenal, and talks began in 1992.
Opponents of this decision in Ukraine argued that possessing nuclear weapons was a guarantee of independence and sovereignty. However, for Kyiv, nuclear weapons were a burden because the control systems remained in Russia, and maintaining the arsenal was a significant financial strain on Ukraine's then-small budget.
After relatively smooth negotiations, the Budapest Memorandum was signed in 1994, which, in exchange for disposing of the atomic arsenal, guaranteed the "independence and sovereignty" of Ukraine's existing borders. The signatories committed to avoiding the "threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine." The guarantors were the USA, the UK, and Russia.
The arsenal was to be transferred to the Russian Federation, where the carriers and warheads were dismantled under international supervision. The last warhead was moved to Russia in June 1996.
In 2010, during the nuclear security summit in Washington, Ukraine committed to disposing of high-enriched uranium. Approximately 515 pounds of the material were transferred to Russia between 2010 and 2012 with the help of the USA. This action fulfilled another obligation for non-proliferation and efforts towards nuclear security.
By annexing Crimea and initiating the conflict in Donbas, Russia violated the Budapest Memorandum. The full-scale war that erupted in 2022 marked a complete breach of the memorandum.
At that time, discussions among Ukrainian politicians revived regarding whether the decision to relinquish atomic weapons was a mistake. In the early days of the war, figures like Oleksiy Danilov, then Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, who was dismissed in the spring of 2024, mentioned it. He asserted that Ukraine needs an alliance with a nuclear power like the United Kingdom, emphasizing the need for an effective defense system in the face of Russian aggression. However, he distanced himself from the idea that Ukraine is considering building nuclear weapons.
More radical was Oleksiy Arestovych, former advisor to President Zelensky. In 2023, he stated that creating Ukraine’s own nuclear weapons would be feasible. He remarked, "Obtaining enriched uranium takes some time. But such things happen. You never know where uranium might be. Sometimes you're just walking, and suddenly there's a barrel of uranium lying there."
Could Ukraine build an atomic bomb?
The removal of highly enriched uranium from Ukraine means that Ukrainians lack the appropriate materials to build an atomic bomb. It's unlikely they'd come across a barrel of uranium unexpectedly. However, they do have considerable plutonium resources, though using them could be problematic.
As Pavel Podvig, an expert on arms control and nuclear security at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, noted, "Ukraine has seven tons of plutonium, which could be used to build hundreds of warheads. However, all this plutonium is in spent fuel. To extract it, a processing facility is needed, which Ukraine does not possess."
Some voices suggest this scenario is realistic. Maj. Oleksiy Hetman, a prominent military expert, believes that Ukraine has the technology, specialists, and uranium to create an atomic bomb. He stated, "Two months is quite a realistic scenario." Meanwhile, Mariana Budjeryn, a researcher at the Belfer Center at Harvard Kennedy School, argues that Ukraine could carry out a nuclear weapons development program at the Kyiv Institute for Nuclear Research.
These claims lean more toward journalism than realistic assessment. The cost of the program, the time needed to build the bomb, and especially the lack of appropriate delivery systems, suggest a misallocation of resources that could otherwise be used to expand the armed forces.
Additionally, Russia would not remain passive, and any attempt by Ukraine to develop a nuclear arsenal would likely provoke a reaction from the Kremlin. The Kyiv Institute for Nuclear Research could become a target for Russian attacks, much like the Iranian nuclear weapons research center, Taleghani 2, in Parchin became a target for Israeli bombs.
The idea of building a Ukrainian nuclear warhead, although theoretically possible, remains unrealistic in practice. Zelensky’s remarks to Donald Trump in October won't change that: "What options do we have? Either Ukraine will have nuclear weapons as a defense, or we must join an alliance like NATO." Moreover, the Ukrainian president quickly clarified that work on nuclear weapons is not underway.
