When Guarantees Mean Nothing: A Nuclear Story That Hurts Ukraine

Today, nine countries possess nuclear weapons. Together, they hold approximately 12,000 nuclear warheads. The vast majority belong to Russia and the United States—each with several thousand. They are followed by China, France, the United Kingdom, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea. More than 3,500 warheads are currently on high alert, ready for launch at short notice.

The U.S. and Russia represent the old guard. Their arsenals have shrunk since the Cold War, but modernization is ongoing. Both nations reserve the right to launch a first strike. Washington frames nuclear weapons as a last resort, while Moscow regularly hints it could use them at any time if the “existence of the state” is threatened—a deliberately vague phrase that functions as a tool of pressure in itself.

The U.K. and France are often seen as nuclear gentlemen of sorts: their arsenals are small but strategically sufficient. In 2021, the U.K. even slightly raised its cap on warheads—the first increase in decades. Both countries maintain a deterrent posture without making first-strike threats or pledging to fully renounce the option.

China is the rapidly rising newcomer. Not long ago, its nuclear strategy was based on “minimum deterrence.” Today, it’s building hundreds of new missile silos. While Beijing officially commits to a no-first-use policy, the sheer scale of its expansion tells its own story. China’s nuclear ambitions are now deeply intertwined with global nuclear balance, its Taiwan strategy, and the evolving dynamics with the United States.

India and Pakistan are a nuclear pair on a hair trigger. Both countries possess roughly equivalent arsenals. India publicly adheres to a no-first-use policy, while Pakistan takes the opposite stance: it reserves the right to strike first if Indian tanks cross the border. In this case, nuclear weapons function as high-stakes arguments in a conflict that has lasted for decades.

Israel remains silent, but everyone knows. Its long-standing policy of “nuclear ambiguity” is a cornerstone of its security strategy. It’s widely believed to possess around 100 nuclear warheads, though it has never confirmed this officially. This quiet defense—a doctrine of silence—has proven effective in a region where full-scale conflict could erupt at any moment.

North Korea is in a category of its own, a nuclear outlier. With an estimated several dozen warheads, Pyongyang combines its arsenal with loud, aggressive rhetoric, treating nuclear weapons as both a shield and a means of blackmail. The DPRK openly reserves the right to launch a first strike. Its nuclear program remains one of the most unpredictable and destabilizing variables in today’s geopolitical landscape

In the end, the nuclear club is more than just a list of countries with warheads. It’s a collection of stories about fear, deterrence, and walking the razor’s edge. While one country gave up its arsenal in the name of peace, others were busy upgrading their launch buttons. The world remains at a nuclear crossroads. Where it turns next is an open question.

So, does Ukraine need nuclear weapons? The question is not really about missiles; it’s about trust: in international guarantees, in global partners, in systems meant to ensure security. Right now, that trust is in short supply. Experience has shown that without power, there is no deterrence. For Ukraine, the path forward lies in developing other forms of security to ensure that its safety will never again depend solely on someone else’s signature without real, tangible support.

***

Created with the support of the Association of Independent Regional Publishers of Ukraine and Amediastiftelsen as part of the Regional Media Support Hub project. The authors’ views do not necessarily coincide with the official position of the partners.

Читайте також When a Nation Remembers: Why and How Days of Mourning Are Declared in Ukraine