6 Comments

How's about Ukraine? Very motivated, has nuclear reactors, has long range delivery systems and used to host Soviet nuclear weapons. Is he interested in how well suited they are to pursue them.

Expand full comment

Good question. Probably many of the same limiting reasons apply to Ukraine: Strong IAEA oversight making fissile material acquisition internationally visible; dependence on continued western support that may be withheld in a nuclear breakout move; vulnerability to pre-emptive russian strikes on program sites.

Expand full comment

I was considering nuclear latency for Ukraine. It might work under certain conditions in international relations.

Expand full comment

Informative piece, thank you.

Expand full comment

Imho, nuclear non-proliferation is already dead. Ukraine gave up nukes - and it was attacked soon after by one of the security guarantors with silent indifference (and often with coverup) of other nukes-wielding guarantors. Genocide of Ukrainians is ongoing, and demonstrates to everyone what happens with non-proliferators - physical extermination.

There is no reason for the Central and East European countries not to acquire nukes, preferably by working together, to limit willingness of others to introduce sanctions and hamper the effort by other means.

Expand full comment

Great text. I don't see how the Baltic countries could survive without nuclear deterrence if the USA quits NATO. Israel is not parto of it due to the threats that if faces. The Baltic Countries are in an even more precarious position.

Expand full comment