rachel.blog

“Give us your weapons, we’ll look after you”

On the 5th December 1994, the UK, US and Russia signed a security assurance with Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine relinquishing its nuclear weapons. At the time, Ukraine had the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world; weapons left over from the former Soviet Union. The agreement was signed in Budapest, Hungary and as a result is called the Budapest Memorandum.

The full text of the agreement is available online at Memorandum on security assurances in connection with Ukraine’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. You can clearly see the signatures of British PM John Major, US President Bill Clinton, Russian President Yeltsin and Ukrainian President Kravchuk.

There are 6 main points of agreement in relation to Ukraine, its independence and a promise not to use force against it except in self-defence. Perhaps the most important point is point 4 which I’ll also type in full.

4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United National Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of agression in which nuclear weapons are used.

Russia broke this agreement in 2014 when it invaded Crimea. In hindsight the US and UK were too weak in their response which emboldened Putin in his full-scale invasion in 2022. If the US abandons Ukraine now it will also break the agreement.

What message does this send to Ukraine and other nations thinking about building their own nuclear arsenal? It says security agreements with the US and Russia are worthless and if you ever find yourself under attack you cannot depend on their earlier promises. It sends a very clear message that if you need a nuclear deterrent you have to build it yourself. In other words, don’t give up your weapons on the promise of peace for those promises are quickly forgotten when a new President comes to power.

Posted

in

by

Rachel M

Tags:

, , , , , , ,

Comments

8 responses to ““Give us your weapons, we’ll look after you””

  1. Katrina Avatar
    Katrina

    Russia hasn’t used nuclear weapons against Ukraine, has it? The agreement cited appears to be in the event of nuclear weapons being used.

    Reply
    1. Rachel M Avatar
      Rachel M

      I did wonder that myself. It’s a bit ambiguous. But when I looked into why the agreement wasn’t being respected there were other reasons given; not this. I think that particular sentence could be interpreted either way. It says, “if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression OR”.

      The other points on the agreement are very clear about respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty and borders and Russia has completely reneged on those – no ambiguity there!

      Reply
      1. Katrina Avatar
        Katrina

        Yes – I see what you mean about the possible ambiguity. Perhaps the lack of a comma means that it’s not an either/or circumstance, but part of the same circumstance? I guess only the writer, or signers, of it could tell us 🙂

      2. Rachel M Avatar
        Rachel M

        Yes, only the writers will know. The same sentence also mentions the threat of nuclear aggression and Putin has been walking a very fine line here. There’s mention of it on the UK government site https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9825/

        I’m not sure if you read the rest of the document but it’s very clear about respecting the sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine. Putin is treating it like Hitler treated Chamberlain’s peace agreement in 1938 as, “just a scrap of paper”.

      3. Katrina Avatar
        Katrina

        There’s no doubt that Putin did what he did, but also no doubt that there were provocations, from what I’ve been reading. There’s been meddling from countries, too, notably the US and UK – but they’re alone – for whom it suits that Russia is tied up in a war with Ukraine. However, that appears to be history now, as Zelensky seems to have accepted the deal offered by Trump – after getting promises of solidarity and money from numerous countries – lol! Well played, eh? 😄

      4. Rachel M Avatar
        Rachel M

        Yes, we’re all hoping the deal goes ahead and it’s looking promising overnight. Just as long as no land is conceded to Russia. I see nothing has been signed yet.

        How exactly did the UK and US provoke Russia and please don’t parrot Russian talking points about promises not to expand Nato. Nato is a defensive alliance. They haven’t attacked Russia. You can’t compare membership of a defensive alliance with physical invasion of another country. And lets not forget the mountain of provocation from Putin – remember he blew up a commercial Malaysian airline in 2014 or when he sent his henchmen to England with the nerve agent novichok poisoning several people and killing a completely innocent British citizen. Then of course there’s the fact he murders his political opponents, has never won an election in his life, imprisons anyone who objects to the war (oh sorry I mean “special military operation”) and the 20,000 children he abducted from Ukraine who still held and unable to return to their homes and families. I could go on. This is just a small snippet. We’ve let him get away with far too much provocation and he will just keep doing more since he knows no one will stop him.

      5. Katrina Avatar
        Katrina

        Ah – I see you’ve set the terms and boundaries of engagement – smart move – lol! And fired a volley of accusations, with which I can only hope to beat with even more accusations, or at least neutralise with the same amount. However, I think we both know that there’s no neutralising the engagement once we start down that path. So, the smart move for me would have been just to have read your viewpoint and not engaged at all, like just about everyone else probably has. That’s not to say I don’t have any ammunition, because I read, too, but I shall refrain from sharing it, because the honest truth is I can’t really be bothered to start what I know that would start. That’s not to say Putin didn’t do what he did, or has done what he’s done, and is the bigger villain in this instance, but there are many, many ugly and provocative threads to this conflict, not restricted only to Russia, which go back years, and which we don’t read about as much as we do as when our favourite villains transgress.

      6. Rachel M Avatar
        Rachel M

        Sure, I’m not going to say Ukraine is flawless either and I’m glad we agree that Putin is the bigger villain.

Leave a reply to Rachel M Cancel reply