Zelenskyy’s Nuclear Weapon Comments Prompt Skepticism From the US

Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy proposes nuclear armament as NATO membership falters, sparking a less than enthusiastic response from Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg.

Key Takeaways

Zelenskyy suggests Ukraine should receive nuclear weapons if NATO membership is delayed.
Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in 1994 for security assurances, now viewed as inadequate.
Retired Lt. General and Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg has expressed skepticism about supporting Ukraine’s nuclear rearmament.
NATO faces pressure to reassess its military preparedness and member nations’ defense spending.
Negotiations between Ukraine and Russia are underway, with concessions needed for peace.

Zelenskyy’s Nuclear Proposition

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has suggested that Ukraine should be given nuclear weapons if its NATO membership is delayed. This statement comes as Ukraine faces ongoing tensions with Russia and frustration over the slow progress of its NATO aspirations.

“What will be defending us against this evil, for this whole time on this whole path? Which support package? Which missiles? Will we be given nuclear weapons? Then let them give us nuclear weapons,” Zelenskyy stated in a recent interview.

⚡️ Ukraine should receive nuclear weapons if NATO entry is delayed, Zelensky says.

Zelensky acknowledged that Ukraine's NATO accession could be delayed "for years or decades," raising the question of how the country would defend itself.https://t.co/pT55qmEWvv

— The Kyiv Independent (@KyivIndependent) February 5, 2025

Historical Context and Current Dilemma

Ukraine’s nuclear proposition is rooted in its historical decision to relinquish its nuclear arsenal in 1994. The country gave up its nuclear weapons in exchange for security assurances from Russia, the UK, and the US through the Budapest Memorandum. However, Russia’s actions have since violated these assurances, leaving Ukraine vulnerable.

“Let’s do this: return (to) us nuclear weapons; give us missile systems; help us finance a million-strong army; or deploy your contingents in parts of our country where we want stability so that people feel safe,” Zelenskyy said, outlining potential alternatives to NATO membership.

U.S. Response and NATO’s Stance

The United States has responded with skepticism to Zelenskyy’s nuclear proposition. Retired Lt. General and Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg stated in response, “The chance of them getting their nuclear weapons back is somewhere between slim and none.” This stance reflects the broader international concern about nuclear proliferation and the potential escalation of tensions in the region.

“Remember, the president said we’re a government of common sense,” Kellogg added. “When somebody says something like that, look at the outcome or the potential. That’s using your common sense.”

NATO’s Future and Defense Spending

The ongoing conflict has put pressure on NATO to reassess its military preparedness. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has urged increased support for Ukraine, warning that a Russian victory would be a costly geopolitical mistake for NATO allies. This situation has sparked discussions about defense spending among NATO members, with some nations being urged to enhance their military budgets.

Path Forward: Negotiations and Concessions

Despite the nuclear rhetoric, both Ukraine and Russia have shown willingness to engage in peace talks. Zelenskyy has expressed openness to meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war, although no concrete plans have been made. Initial negotiations between the two nations have begun, with the understanding that concessions will be necessary from both sides to achieve a lasting peace deal.

As tensions persist and negotiations continue, the international community watches closely. The outcome of these discussions will not only shape the future of Ukraine and its relationship with NATO but also significantly impact global geopolitical dynamics and nuclear non-proliferation efforts.