What if...the West gave back the nuclear weapon to Ukraine? Unearthing the treaty put under the carpet...
Updated: Aug 19, 2025
The Budapest Memorandum lies at the heart of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
In the early 90s, the former Soviet Union States were in disarray and politically unstable. It was feared that these newly independent States did not have sufficient resources to maintain nuclear arsenal properly and, plagued by corruption, nuclear parts could be sold to rogue States and terrorist organizations.
In 1994, under international pressure, Ukraine surrendered its nuclear arsenal – the third-largest in the world at the time – in exchange for security assurances from the United States, United Kingdom, and Russia. These guarantors vowed to respect Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Yet, their promises have been shattered.
In 2014, Russia annexed Crimea and fueled separatist movements in eastern Ukraine, violating the very terms of the Memorandum. The West's response was muted, with then-leaders Barack Obama and David Cameron failing to uphold their commitments.
Even as the full-scale invasion unfolded in 2022, Western powers were reluctant to intervene decisively, fearing escalation with a nuclear-armed Russia. Instead some leaders like B, Johnson boasted as the UK being the top ally of V. Zelinsky, as UK trained Ukrainian troops and claimed it was among their largest weapons supplier. Many anouncements, very often deceived in reality. When E. Macron mentionned an hypothetical sending of troops in Ukriane, Downing street and the White House were quick to take their distance and give assurance to Putin that it would be out of questions.
The Budapest Memorandum has been a mere footnote in the diplomatic discourse, and barely mentionned in the news. However, it should have been the cornerstone of Western policy, and Western public's mind, demanding a resolute stance against Russian aggression and unwavering support for Ukraine's territorial integrity.
Western military support to Ukraine has been too little too late. Ukrainian troops now lack amunitions and retreat in several areas. The war is getting longer, and public opinion's fatigue is growing.
Voices aligned with Putin are seizing on the civilian toll to advocate a cessation of hostilities. Thousands of Ukrainian civilians have perished, and millions more have been displaced from their homes. Yet the motives of these self-proclaimed "peace promoters" should be scrutinized, for they are allies of the very man who initiated this conflict - Vladimir Putin himself.
Russia's invasion has been a multi-step process, starting first with the annexation of Crimea and Donbass in 2014, then followed by the failed attempt to capture Kyiv in 2022. However, Russian troops still occupy 20% of Ukrainian territory. Freezing the conflict in its current state risks emboldening Putin to launch further aggression in the future.
Cease-fire and time are on Russia's side, allowing them to re-organized their depleted army and prepare the next military offensives as well as to "Russify" the occupied territories through tactics like forced relocations of children, sham elections, and the imposition of Russian education and passports. This would be the consequences of peace.
Actually the West's slow reaction and reluctance to give all necessary military support to Ukraine disconcert the pro-Putin's rhetoric that NATO was threatening Russia. If it was the case the West would have attacked Russia first or would have been more reactive and better prepared to counter-attack Russia in Ukraine and even on Russia's territory. The West has been on the back foot. Its overall reaction was mainly with series of political declarations and legal sanctions. Military support started with with helmets...Then it took months to cross the red lines of sending tanks and then medium-range missiles, there are still reluctance to send jet-fighters and even conditioning the delivery of weapons to the Ukrainians, not to reach targets in Russia.
A very cautious stance...
The question now arises: Should Ukraine regain its nuclear deterrent, given the West's failure to protect it? While such a move would undermine the Non-Proliferation Treaty, it could arguably be justified by the breach of the Budapest agreement. It might be the only way to halt Russia's advances, regain its sovereignty upon all its territories and deter Russia from future invasion plans. The West will not choose this option as it would open Pandora's box of nuclear proliferation. The West will then have no longer the legal framework to refrain rogue States to access and use nuclear weapons.
Alternatively, the West could double down on its conventional military support for Ukraine, providing the resources and weaponry necessary to reclaim all occupied territories within the 1991 borders. This would require a surge in arms supplies, coupled with a wartime economic footing for European states, following Poland's lead in boosting defence spending. But this takes time, following decades of underspending and restrictions in military budgets.
Western public opinion must shed its complacency or denial. "This is not my war", can we hear. Well the Western population will get more involved and exposed in the next one for certain. Western citizens have to embrace the reality that the era of peaceful consumerism is over. Adapting to this new reality and asserting their values and interests is crucial to protecting the Western way of life. The syndrome of Munich is more present than initially expected, despite all the appeasement signals given to Putin. Surrendering early for the illusion of short-term peace will only embolden hostile forces and threaten Western populations in the long run.
The Budapest Memorandum was a solemn promise, now broken. The West's inaction has eroded its influence and credibility signalling the end of the post-Cold War order. Regional powers hostility will increase if US and European countries don't act more thoroughly on the side of their allies and stand up for their diplomatic obligations. It is time to wake up, uphold commitments, and take decisive action to secure a lasting peace in Ukraine and protect the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity that underpin the international system.
