Hacker News Reader

Comment by ceejayoz | Hacker News Reader

> Enriching uranium is within the capability of a nation-state the size of Ukraine.

Sure. But standing up a program makes you an international pariah. “We’re keeping this” would have had a bit less uproar.

> Physical access to a nuke does not let you disable the PAL. They are constructed so that they are embedded within the device, and cannot be disabled or altered without deconstructing significant parts of the warhead.

People say this sort of thing, but it comes out that the US arsenal was set to 00000000 in fear that they couldn’t be used. I have… severe doubts on the uncrackable nature of Soviet nuclear cryptography.

View on HN

The US invaded Iraq, because of the phantom prospect of a nuclear proliferation. A state which was just created and gave up Crimea without a shot fired in 2014 was not about to fight to keep nukes which were not theirs in the 90’s. With the combined forces of the West and Russia breathing down their necks there was zero chance that they would be able to keep them.

North Korea serves as a pretty clear counterexample.

Having nukes actually in-hand changes the calculus, a lot.

They'd have been sanctioned like crazy, but invaded? No one's taking the risk that they managed to arm a bomb.

Ukraine is free to develop nukes for self-defence because it's attacked by nuclear country.

No country in the world is free to develop nukes, for any reason. Some still do, of course, but it is expressly forbidden by international laws and agreements.

Except Ukraine, because Ukraine invaded by nuclear country. Read the agreement, please.

Quote from the agreement, please.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/P...

Nothing in it says anything like "if broken, Ukraine can have a nuclear program".

Кожний Учасник цього Договору в порядку здійснення свого державного суверенітету має право вийти з Договору, якщо він вирішить, що пов'язані зі змістом цього Договору виняткові обставини поставили під загрозу найвищі інтереси його країни. Про такий вихід він повідомляє за три місяці всіх Учасників Договору і Раду Безпеки Організації Об'єднаних Націй. В такому повідомленні має міститися заява про виняткові обставини, які він розглядає як такі, що поставили під загрозу його найвищі інтереси.

Загроза силою чи її використання проти територіальної цілісності та недоторканності кордонів чи політичної незалежності України з боку будь-якої ядерної держави, так само, як і застосування економічного тиску, спрямованого на те, щоб підкорити своїм власним інтересам здійснення Україною прав, притаманних її суверенітету, розглядатимуться Україною як виняткові обставини, що поставили під загрозу її найвищі інтереси.

Цей Закон набирає чинності після надання Україні ядерними державами гарантій безпеки, оформлених шляхом підписання відповідного міжнародно-правового документа.

Machine translation (Gemma2):

Each Participant of this Treaty, in the exercise of its state sovereignty, has the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it determines that exceptional circumstances related to the content of this Treaty have threatened the supreme interests of its country. Such withdrawal shall be notified to all Participants of the Treaty and the Security Council of the United Nations three months in advance. The notification shall contain a statement on the exceptional circumstances which it considers to threaten its supreme interests.

Threat of force or its use against the territorial integrity and inviolability of borders or political independence of Ukraine by any nuclear state, as well as the application of economic pressure aimed at subjugating the exercise by Ukraine of rights inherent in its sovereignty to its own interests, shall be considered by Ukraine as exceptional circumstances that threaten its supreme interests.

This Act shall enter into force after Ukraine has received security assurances from nuclear states, formalized through the signing of a relevant international legal document.

That's a separate agreement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Prohibition_of_N....

It cannot be withdrawn mid-conflict:

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/tpnw-2017/art...

> Such withdrawal shall only take effect 12 months after the date of the receipt of the notification of withdrawal by the Depositary. If, however, on the expiry of that 12-month period, the withdrawing State Party is a party to an armed conflict, the State Party shall continue to be bound by the obligations of this Treaty and of any additional protocols until it is no longer party to an armed conflict.

Ukraine also isn't a signatory to it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Treaty_...

Which specific agreement are you trying to quote from, because it's not the Budapest Memorandom?

The treaty, signed by Ukraine:

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_098#Text

Ukrainian law about joining the treaty:

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/248/94-%D0%B2%D1%80#Text

OK, that one is the original 1968 treaty they acceded to after leavin the Soviet Union. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferatio....

As with any treaty, it can be broken/withdrawn from.

The treaty does not establish a right/recourse to a nuclear weapons program to NPT members in Ukraine's scenario. Ukraine just, when agreeing to it, said they'd leave if they had to. They would be non-compliant with the treaty, as North Korea was/is. They would be similarly sanctioned for it.

The Budapest Memorandom was a separate agreement, predicated on acceptance of the NPT. Similarly, nothing in it says "you can have a nuclear weapons program in scenario x".

Ukraine can join NPT back in exchange for safety assurances. No need for sanctions.

If Ukraine started a nuclear weapons program, they would be in violation of the NPT treaty. Sanctions and loss of Western support would be virtually guaranteed.

Ukraine is not bound by NPT because we are attacked by nuclear country. See text of NPT signed by Ukraine.

Moreover, Ukraine is post-nuclear country. We had nuclear weapons and we know how to produce more.

Ukraine is bound by the NPT until they exit it. That hasn’t happened so far.

Exiting it would lead to consequences from their allies, which they can’t afford.

It's not so simple, because Ukraine will join NPT when we will have security assurances from nuclear countries. It found recently, that security assurances, given to Ukraine, either a) broken, b) fake, so Ukraine may claim that the essential step is not completed yet.

Ukraine already joined the NPT, in the 1990s. That's a done deal.

Ukraine does not automatically leave the NPT just because Russia violated the Budapest Memorandum; such a mechanism linking the two does not exist. Ukraine would have to explicitly leave the NPT, which they will not do.

It's not a deal. It's cheat to disarm Ukraine. It's stupid to play fair game with cheaters.

But you understand this part, right?

Sanctions and loss of Western support would be virtually guaranteed.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds.

Seriously, this whole nuclear idea you're onto, while no doubt well-intentioned, is infinitely untenable for a whole bunch of plainly obvious reasons.

Ukraine may claim damages. Nuclear countries promised security assurances, then broke them. We have $1T in damages from war.

> Sanctions and loss of Western support would be virtually guaranteed.

This will be a good case to support the claims. Moreover, this support will be unnecessary for a nuclear country, because war will be ended very fast.

Except it's just not going to happen. I don't believe in the stupid propaganda (that gets repeated here almost every week) that Ukraine was manipulated into this war, by Boris or anyone else. Ukraine is entirely independent and makes its own choices.

But the simple fact is, it doesn't have unlimited control over its destiny in this particular regard, and pretending otherwise won't change that fact. It is entirely dependent on Western help at this point -- its benefactors are 1000 percent against any further nuclear proliferation, and are infinitely more concerned about that issue than they are about the borders of Ukraine, or Ukraine's survival in any other sense. They have no interest in the inevitable and far wider confrontation with Russia that would ensue from such recklessness -- and they just aren't going to allow it.

Yep, high dependency on Western help is a problem, which must be solved first.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com