Ukraine: Other Nuclear Weapon-Related Developments
8/9/2002: RUSSIAN WARSHIP CHECKED
FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS
NTV
reported on 9 August 2002 that the Russian warship
Samum, which was transferred from the Baltic Fleet to the Black Sea Fleet,
was inspected by Ukrainian naval officers, including Ukrainian Navy Commander Admiral Mykhaylo Yezhel,
for nuclear weapons upon its arrival in Sevastopol. Ukrainian officers were
accompanied by Russia's Chief of the Naval Main Staff Admiral Vladimir Kravchenko,
according to whom the instructions on conducting the inspection were issued at
the presidential level of both countries. Ukrainian officers inspected the
ship's missile tubes, and found them empty.[1]
Samum
is a Project 1239 Sivuch
missile corvette, a 1,260t warship whose main armament is eight
3M80 Moskit
[NATO designation SS-N-22 'Sunburn'] anti-ship missiles, which are capable of
carrying nuclear payloads.[2] [CNS note: Russian warships have not carried
tactical nuclear weapons since 1992 as a result of the 1991 Bush-Gorbachev
tactical nuclear weapon initiatives.] Sources:
[1] NTV
Television, 9 August 2002; in "Russia: Samum
missile hovercraft deployed to Black Sea carries no nuclear weapons," FBIS
Document CEP20020809000289.
[2] A.S.
Pavlov, Voyennyye korabli SSSR i Rossii 1945-1995 (Yakutsk,
1994), p. 100. {Entered 10/23/2002 MJ}
2/12/2001: JOINT ICBM PRODUCTION NOT ON
UKRAINE-RUSSIA SUMMIT AGENDA On 12 February 2001 Russian President Vladimir Putin
and Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma signed a joint statement in
Dnipropetrovsk (the location of
the Pivdenne Design Bureau and
Pivdenmash,
which formerly designed and produced ICBMs) on expanding
the two countries' aerospace cooperation. The joint statement addressed,
among other issues, cooperation on producing space launch vehicles and
transport aircraft.[1] According to Pivdenmash General Director Yuriy
Alekseyev, the issue of resuming ICBM production in Ukraine was not on the
agenda due to Ukraine's non-nuclear status and to technical difficulties. At
the same time, Alekseyev stated that Pivdenmash specialists have been helping
Russia maintain its R-36M-series [NATO designation SS-18 'Satan'] and
RT-23UTTKh [NATO designation SS-24 'Scalpel'] ICBMs.[2] Alekseyev's remarks
echoed earlier statements made by the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Carlos Pascual.
Commenting on the upcoming meeting between Putin and Kuchma, Pascual stated
that it would be impossible for Ukraine to cooperate with Russia on ICBM
production without contravening the provisions of the
Non-Proliferation
Treaty. Pascual also met with the Ukrainian
National Security and Defense
Council Secretary, Evhen Marchuk, who denied the possibility of cooperation
with Russia in this field.[3] Sources: [1] Interfax, 12 February 2001; in "Russia, Ukraine to expand cooperation
in aerospace field," FBIS Document CEP20010212000161. [2] Mikhail Melnik, ITAR-TASS, 12 February 2001; in "Russia: Putin tour
of Yuzhmash said to have no bearing on US missile defense system," FBIS
Document CEP20010210000025. [3] "Posol SShA na Ukraine schitayet nevozmozhnym sotrudnichestvo Kieva i
Moskvy v proizvodstve mezhkontinentalnykh ballisticheskikh raket,"
Interfax, 3 February 2001. {Entered 5/7/2001 MJ}
11/13/2000: KUCHMA SAYS UKRAINE WILL NEVER
BECOME A NUCLEAR STATE In a discussion with students at Kiev State
University's International Relations Institute on 13 November 2000, President Kuchma stated that
Ukraine will never become a nuclear state. He added that
Ukraine's decision not to pursue nuclear status was for economic rather than
political reasons. Nuclear weapons require infrastructure and
economic resources that Ukraine does not possess.
Furthermore, the expertise and technology to build nuclear weapons is from
Russia, not Ukraine. Kuchma explained that for these reasons Ukraine was
compelled to forego nuclear weapons.
[UNIAN, "Ukraina nikogda ne budet
yadernym gosudarstvom - Prezident," No. 46, 13-19 November 2000.] {Entered
2/14/01 RG}
3/15-16/2000: ELEVEN SU-24 BOMBERS DELIVERED TO
CRIMEA, SECOND GROUP MAY FOLLOW At a meeting in Kyiv held on 15 and 16 March between
Oleksandr Byelov, the deputy secretary of the
National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, and Admiral
Vladimir Kuroyedov, the commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy, the
Ukrainian-Russian commission in charge of the Russian Black Sea Fleet (BSF)
presence in Ukraine agreed to several proposals which may clear the way
for the delivery to Crimea of 11 Su-24 fighter-bombers [NATO name 'Fencer-D'],
the second such group to be sent to Ukraine.[1,2,3] Since 19 January
2000, 11 Su-24 bombers, meant to replace older Su-17s [NATO name
'Fitter'], have been delivered to the Gvardeyskoye airbase near Sevastopol.[3,4]
Although the Su-24 is capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs),
lieutenant-general Valeriy Yurin, commander of the BSF air force, stated
that all equipment pertaining to TNWs had been removed from the aircraft
and that the alterations were inspected by Ukrainian experts before the
aircraft left Russia.[5] A fourth session of the commission will meet in
Moscow in the final quarter of 2000.[3]
Sources: [1] Serhiy Zhurets, "Friendship one
on one. Moscow and Kiev continue the negotiation battles around the
Russian Fleet," Den, 16 March 2000, pp.1,3; in "Ukraine: Black Sea
Fleet issue viewed," FBIS Document CEP20000320000254. [2] Raisa Stetsyura, ITAR-TASS, 16
March 2000; in "Ukraine allows transfer of Russian bombers to Crimea,"
FBIS Document CEP200003316000220. [3] Olha Tanasiychuk, "A Meeting on
the Roadstead," Kievskiye vedomosti, 22 March 2000; in "Ukraine,
Russia Praise Fleet Talks," FBIS Document CEP20000323000133. [4] ITAR-TASS, 19 January 2000; in
"New Sukhoi Jets Fly to Russian Naval Base in Crimea," FBIS Document FTS20000119001822. [5] ITAR-TASS, 18 January 2000; in
"Nuclear Equipment Removed from Russian Aircraft," FBIS Document FTS20000118001777.
{Entered 3/31/2000 GD}
10/1/99: UKRAINE OPPOSES PRESENCE OF RUSSIAN NUCLEAR-CAPABLE
BOMBERS IN CRIMEA Ukrainian government officials are concerned that allowing
Su-24M [NATO name 'Fencer-D'] fighter-bombers, capable of carrying tactical nuclear
weapons, in the Russian Black Sea Fleet may jeopardize its non-nuclear status.
Russia wants to replace Su-17s [NATO name 'Fitter'] at the Russian Gvardeyskoye
Air Base near Simferopol with 22 Su-24Ms.[1,2,3] Russia had planned to begin the
transfer of Su-24Ms from the Anapa naval base in Krasnodar Kray to the Crimean
peninsula on 1 October 1999, at a rate of one plane per day.[2] Ukrainian military
officials demand the right to inspect the bombers for the presence of equipment
that would allow the use of nuclear weapons.[1,3] Ukrainian generals are reportedly
convinced that the Black Sea Fleet had tactical nuclear weapons in its arsenal
until 1991, and that the fleet continues to drill in the use of such weapons.[2]
Ukrainian government officials call for an international agreement that would
address fleet and air unit verification issues.[3,4] Such an agreement exists
for Russian conventional weapons present in the Crimea.[3] Russian officials have
argued that Russia should be allowed to deploy the bombers without delay, saying
that the bombers have been stripped of the equipment used to carry and launch
nuclear weapons. Aleksandr Pikayev, a military analyst at the Moscow Carnegie
Center, pointed out that inspections of military units stationed abroad runs counter
to international practice and therefore should not be required of Russia.[1] The
bomber dispute is not the first incident involving inspections of Russia's Black
Sea Fleet equipment. In May 1999, Russia compelled Ukraine to rescind Government
Decree No. 863, which subjected Russian servicemen's baggage, weapons, and hardware
to inspections, a common international practice.[3]
Sources: [1] Simon Saradzhyan, "Ukraine Stalls
Su-24M Aircraft for Black Sea Fleet," Defense News, 18 October 1999,
p. 32. [2] Viktor Yadukha,
Segodnya,
30
September 1999, p. 2; in WPS Defense and Security, 4 October 1999; in "Leonid
Kuchma Gives Wings to the Black Sea Fleet," Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe,
web.lexis-nexis.com/universe. [3] Serhiy Chornous, "'Sukhoys' With
Nuclear Overtones," Ukrayina Moloda, 14 October 1999, p. 3; in "Bomber
Transfer Seen Threat to Non-Nuclear Status," FBIS Document CEP19991019000015. [4] UNIAN, 8 October 1999; in "Udovenko
Opposes Russian Bombers in Crimea," FBIS Document FTS19991008001385. {Entered
11/18/99 SK} 9/4/99: PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE VITRENKO PROMISES TO RESTORE UKRAINE'S
NUCLEAR STATUS Left wing presidential candidate Nataliya Vitrenko announced that if she
wins the 1999 presidential elections, she will renounce Ukraine's non-nuclear
weapon state status, and create a strategic partnership with Russia and
Belarus as a defense against NATO.
["V sluchaye pobedy na prezidentskikh vyborakh N. Vitrenko
planiruyet vosstanovit yadernyy status Ukrainy," UNIAN, 30 August - 5 September
1999, No. 35.] {Entered 9/10/99 SK}
3/24/99: UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENT
CALLS FOR NON-NUCLEAR STATUS REVISION Reacting to NATO's air strikes against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada adopted a resolution, the fourth clause of which
states "The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine shall submit to the Supreme
Council a draft law on cancelling the decisions and renouncing Ukraine's
obligations concerning its non-nuclear status."[1] Over 66 percent of the
deputies approved the resolution.[2] In response, Ukrainian President Leonid
Kuchma stated that Ukraine is not able to independently maintain nuclear
weapons. He stressed that this was the key factor influencing the decision
to give up its nuclear weapons and that it is impossible to "turn back."[3]
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Borys Tarasyuk responded to this development
by stating that Ukraine has to observe international agreements on its
non-nuclear status.[4] According to Tarasyuk and Kuchma's press secretary,
the deputies' decision was emotional.[2,4] Ukraine's non-nuclear status
is codified in Ukraine's constitution[5] and is further re-affirmed in
the declaration "On the State Sovereignty of Ukraine" adopted in 1990.
Since then, Ukraine has re-confirmed its status as a non-nuclear weapon
state in numerous documents.[2]
Sources: [1] "Zayavleniye press-sluzhby Verkhovnoy rady Ukrainy,"
Estonskoye Agentstvo Novostey ETA, 25 March 1999; in Natsionalnaya sluzhba
novostey, http://nel.nns.ru. [2] "V Kieve zatoskovali o yadernoy bombe," Vremya MN, http://www.mosinfo.ru:8080/.../0325-2.html,
25 March 1999. [3] UNIAN, 29 March 1999; in "Ukraine Cannot Maintain Nuclear
Weapons "Independently" - Kuchma," Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe. [4] UNIAN, 25 March 1999; in "Tarasyuk: Ukraine Must Adhere
To Non-Nuclear Status," FBIS Document FTS19990330000936. [5] "Parlament prinyal resheniye ob otmene bezyadernogo statusa,"
Ekonomicheskoye obozreniye Logos Press, 29 March 1999; Natsionalnaya sluzhba
novostey, http://nel.nns.ru.
{Entered 4/1/99 SK} 1/20/99: UKRAINE PLANS TO CREATE THREAT REDUCTION
AGENCY A threat reduction agency modelled after the US Defense Threat Reduction
Agency is scheduled to open in Ukraine in March 1999.
[Greg Seigle, "Ukraine Aims to Mirror US Threat Reduction,"
Jane's
Defence Weekly, 20 January 1999, p. 6.] {Entered 9/27/99 SK} 3/98: UKRAINIAN OFFICIAL CLAIMS
RUSSIA WILL EQUIP BLACK SEA FLEET WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS Serhey Terekhin, a Verkhovna Rada deputy and chairman
of the "Reforms and Order" party's economic council, claimed at a press
conference that there is a possibility that Russia will deploy tactical
nuclear weapons on its ships based in the Crimea. Terekhin, who based his
allegation on secret documents, claimed that the deployment would occur
in the next few months.[1, 2, 3, 4, 7] According to Terekhin, the Russian
General Staff sent a secret directive to Viktor Kravchenko, commander of
the Russian Black Sea Fleet, instructing him to "carry out a range of preparatory
measures for the...Fleet's acceptance of so-called special products."[1]
Terekhin, who is convinced that these 'special products' are nuclear warheads,
went on to claim that the devices would be sent from a Novorossiysk storage
facility to the Russian fleet's ships based in Sevastopol. The 'special
products' would be deployed on the missile cruisers Admiral Holovko
and Moskva, by means of loading nuclear charges on Bazalt (NATO
designation SS-N-12 "Sandbox") ship-launched cruise missile systems.[1,
2, 4] Terekhin based his allegations on several other secret documents
as well, including a study commissioned by the Russian Defense Council,
entitled "The Place and Role of Modern Tactical Weapons Systems in Resolving
the Russian Federation Armed Forces' Strategic Tasks."[1, 4] According
to Terekhin, the report concludes that "strengthening the strike capability
of the fleet forces based in the Black Sea-Mediterranean Sea region by
means of nuclear missile systems of an operational-tactical class corresponds
to the task of deterrence."[4] In addition, Terekhin had access to the
classified text of the Program of Economic Cooperation of Russia and Ukraine
for 1998-2007, which he claimed supported his allegation. In the final
version of the agreement, a previously included section on environmental
security at Black Sea Fleet bases had been removed. Terekhin believes that
the section disappeared due to guidelines reportedly set forth by the International
Atomic Energy Agency, which state that territories where nuclear arms are
located are declared to be environmentally hazardous. In Terekhin's view,
Ukrainian leaders "know about Russia's nuclear plans."[1, 2, 4] Responding
to these allegations, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Gennadiy Tarasov
denied that "tactical nuclear missiles may be deployed aboard ships of
the Black Sea Fleet stationed in the Crimean Peninsula." Tarasov stated
that Russia "strictly adheres to the agreements reached by the Russian
and Ukrainian Presidents with regard to Ukraine's nuclear-free status."[5,
7] The commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy, Vladimir Kuroyedov, also
denied that the fleet is armed with nuclear weapons, but said that both
the Ukrainian and Russian Black Sea Fleets are equipped with ships, aircraft,
and delivery systems which can handle nuclear weapons if required. While
"the delivery capabilities exist," Kuroyedov added that "these navies are
not facing such tasks at the moment."[6]
Sources: [1] Viktor Lugovik and Viktor Yadukha,
"Rossiya gotova razmestit v Sevastople yadernoye oruzhiye," Segodnya,
28 March 1998, p. 3. [2] Unian, 25 March 1998; in "Ukrainian
Official Says Russia to Deploy Warheads in Crimea," FBIS-TAC-98-084. [3] RIA-Novosti Hotline, 26 March 1998,
Issue 058. [4] Anatoliy Skychko, "This is Just
What We Need--Russian Nuclear Warheads," Vseukrainskiye vedomosti,
26 March 1998, p. 7; in "Nuclear Plans Threat to Russia," FBIS-SOV-98-100,
10 April 1998. [5] RIA (Interfax), 31 March 1998;
in "Russia Denies Arming of Black Sea Fleet With Nuclear Arms," FBIS-SOV-98-090. [6] Interfax, 9 April 1998; in "Russian
Navy Official: No Nuclear Arms in Black Sea Fleet," FBIS-UMA-98-099. [7] Press-tsentr MID Rossii, "Zapis
brifinga direktora departamenta informatsii i pechati MID RF G. P. Tarasova,"
31 March 1998. {Entered 4/20/98 SP} 4/7/97: DEPUTY CLAIMS UKRAINE IS
CAPABLE OF PRODUCING ITS OWN NUCLEAR WEAPONS The chairman of Ukraine's Verkhovna
Rada Defense and National Security Commission, Volodymyr Mukhin, stated
that "the scientific and industrial potential of Ukraine will allow for
the production of our own nuclear weapons." Mukhin emphasized that
the removal of tactical nuclear weapons to Russia had been a mistake, and
expressed doubts regarding whether the US would pay $700 million dollars
promised in compensation for Ukraine's nuclear weapons.
["Ukraina sposobna sozdat svoye
yadernoye oruzhiye," Delovoy mir, 3 April 1997, p. 2.] {Entered
3/2/98 SP} 4/19/96: UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT AT G-7 NUCLEAR SUMMIT 4/19/96-4/20/96 a summit on nuclear safety took place in
Moscow with the participation of the G-7 leaders and the Russian and Ukrainian
presidents. President Kuchma called on the participants in the summit to
cooperate under the auspices of the International Scientific-Research Center
for the study the effects of the persistent radiation on flora and fauna
in the unique conditions of the Chornobyl zone.
["Yaderna bezpeka i ne tilky" under the rubric "Moskovsky
samit velykoi simky," Politika i chas, 6/96, pp. 82-83.]
1/96:TWENTY TU-22M3 BOMBERS WILL BE DEPLOYED IN
POLTAVA In the last week of January 1996 four TU-22M3 (NATO designation:
Tu-26 Backfire) missile-carrying bombers arrived in Poltava. The bombers
were transferred to Ukraine as part of the process of dividing the Black
Sea Fleet. Colonel Vasyl Kukulenko, deputy commander of a bomber division,
told a SOTSIUM correspondent that 20 aircraft of this class will comprise
a regiment to be deployed in Poltava.
[Vitaliy Tsebriy, "We Have Strategic Bombers, But Their Strategic
Task Remains a Military Secret," Kyivskiye vedomosti, 1/31/96, in
"Ukraine: National Affairs," FBIS-SOV-96-023, 1/31/96]
11/20/95:RUSSIAN AND UKRAINIAN DEFENSE MINISTERS
AGREED TO JOINTLY FINANCE A BALLISTIC MISSILE EARLY WARNING SYSTEM Ukrainian and Russian Defense Ministers, Pavel Grachev and
Valeriy Shmarov, agreed on a plan to jointly finance a ballistic missile
early warning system (BMEWS) using a former Soviet radar in Ukraine. (This
radar is undoubtedly the missile warning radar based at Mukhacheve.) The
two sides disagreed on an air defense system for other Soviet states.)
["In Russia," Post-Soviet Nuclear and Defense Monitor,
11/30/95, p. 11.]
1/18/94:UKRAINE IS CONCERNED ABOUT SECURITY GUARANTEES
AND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR ELIMINATING NUCLEAR WEAPONS Anatoliy Plyushko, Ukrainian Ambassador to the People's Republic
of China, and Dai Bingo, PRC Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, signed
a declaration that addressed Ukraine's concern for security guarantees
and financial assistance for eliminating nuclear weapons on its territory.
[Kyiv Radio Ukraine World Service, 1/18/94; in "Ukraine,
PRC Envoys Discuss Nuclear Disarmament," FBIS-SOV-94-014, 1/21/94, p. 41.]
1/14/94:UNITED STATES WILL BUY 500 TONS OF HEU
REMOVED FROM RUSSIAN AND UKRAINIAN WARHEADS The United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) and Russian
Minister of Atomic Energy Viktor Mikhailov signed an $11.9 billion deal
in which the United States will buy 500 tons of HEU removed from Russian
and Ukrainian warheads. Russia will blend down the HEU into LEU prior to
delivery in the United States, where it will be used to fuel nuclear reactors.
Each year for the next five years, the United States will purchase ten
tons of uranium. After that, the United States will buy 30 tons of HEU
(equivalent to 930 tons of LEU) per year.
["US Signs Contract For Purchase Of Enriched Uranium From
Former Soviet Stockpile," USCEA Infowire, 1/14/94.]
10/6/93:RUSSIAN MFA BLAMES UKRAINE FOR DISRUPTING
SERVICING AND STORAGE SCHEDULE FOR NUCLEAR WARHEADS Georgiy Karasin, the Director of the Information and Press
Department at the Russian Federation's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, blamed
Ukraine for the disruptions to the servicing and storage schedule for the
nuclear warheads.[1] In the case of the storage facility at Pervomaysk,
Karasin stated that six to eight times the allowable number of warheads
are being stored together.[1] Karasin advocated that all the warheads that
have been taken off-line should be transported to Russia immediately.[1]
A Ukrainian representative stated that, according to the commission that
Russia sent to Ukraine to assess the situation, there was no cause for
alarm.[1] He added that any disruptions to the servicing schedule were
caused by the Russian Ministry of Defense.[1] Another report cited the
Russian commission as stating that the situation in the storage facility
was intolerable and that an emergency situation could occur; the commission
was comprised of experts from Minatom, the Ministry of Defense, and the
State Committee for Affairs of Civil Defense, Emergency Situations, and
the Elimination of Natural Disasters.[2]
[1] Ihor Zabilyk, Holos Ukrainy, 10/7/93, p. 5; in
"Defense Official: `No Grounds for Alarm' Over Nuclear Storage Sites,"
JPRS-TND-93-034, 10/27/93, p. 39. [2] Valeriy Ivanov, Komsomolskaya pravda, 10/7/93,
p. 1, in JPRS-TND-93-034, 10/27/93, p. 40.
9/93:RUSSIA ANNULS MASSANDRA SUMMIT’S PROTOCOL Russia reportedly annulled a protocol signed by Ukraine and
Russia at the Massandra Summit, which stated that all nuclear weapons of
the Strategic Nuclear Forces stationed in Ukraine would be withdrawn to
Russia not more than 24 months after Ukraine has ratified the START I Treaty.[1]
Russia claimed that Ukraine added an amendment stating that only those
warheads removed from the launchers to be destroyed under the START I Treaty
are included in this latest agreement; this excludes the SS-24 ICBMs.[2]
Ukraine maintains that the amendment was added before the protocol was
signed.[2]
[1] Pavel Shinkarenko, "The Truth About Nuclear Weapons.
Russia Denounced Protocol On The Withdrawal Of All Nuclear Warheads From
Ukraine," Rossiyskiye vesti, 9/22/93, p. 1. [2] "Russia Annuls Protocol On Nuclear Weapons," RFE/RL NEWS
BRIEFS, 9/20/93, p. 8.
7/26/93:UKRAINE MIGHT JOIN NPT AS TRANSITIONAL
COUNTRY Ukrainian Defense Minister Kostyantyn Morozov hinted that
Ukraine might join the NPT as a transitional country that inherited nuclear
weapons but will eliminate them.
[John Lepingwell, "Russia, Ukraine, and Nuclear Weapons Supplementary
Chronology," RFE/RL RESEARCH REPORT, 1/28/94, Vol. 3, No. 4, p. 23.]
7/2/93:ALL NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON THE UKRAINIAN TERRITORY
BELONG TO UKRAINE Ukrainian Parliament passed a new defense doctrine that stated
that all nuclear weapons on Ukrainian territory belong to Ukraine. It also
declared that Ukraine is committed to becoming a non-nuclear state in the
future.
[John Lepingwell, "Ukraine's Position Hardens Despite Some Positive
Signs," Arms Control Today, 9/93, p. 25.]
6/3/93:PRIME-MINISTER KUCHMA DEMANDS COMPENSATION
FOR DISARMAMENT Prime Minister Kuchma is said to support demanding compensation
for disarmament while temporarily declaring Ukraine a nuclear state.
[John Lepingwell, "Ukraine, Russia, and Nuclear Weapons Supplementary
Chronology," RFE/RL RESEARCH REPORT, 1/28/94, Vol. 3, No. 4, p. 22.]
5/9/93:UNITED STATES WILL ADD TO $175 MILLION
ALREADY OFFERED FOR DISARMAMENT US Ambassador-at-Large Strobe Talbott arrived in Kyiv to
discuss a new American policy toward Ukrainian disarmament that would emphasize
cooperation rather than pressure. Talbott insinuated that, upon START I
ratification, the United States would add to the roughly $175 million already
offered in assistance for disarmament.
[Nucleaer Fuel, 1/17/93, pp. 16-17.]
4/10/93:DISMANTLING NUCLEAR WEAPONS IS MORE EXPENSIVE
THAN MAINTAINING THEM Yuriy Kostenko stated that studies show it would be more
expensive to dismantle the nuclear weapons than to maintain them.
[John Lepingwell, "Ukraine, Russia, and Nuclear Weapons Supplementary
Chronology," RFE/RL RESEARCH REPORT, 1/28/94, Vol. 3, No. 4, p. 21.]
4/93: NUCLEAR WEAPONS WILL REMAIN ON UKRAINIAN SOIL Defense Minister Kostiantyn Morozov announced that the 43rd
Strategic Missile Forces Army will pledge allegiance to Ukraine. Morozov
also stressed that, regardless of the decision to be made by the Supreme
Rada, the nuclear weapons in Ukraine would remain on the nation's soil
for years to come.
["Ekho" Radio Program, 4/10/93, in Russia and CIS Today,
4/13/93, p. 28.]
3/25/93:UKRAINE’S INTENTION TO BECOME A NON-NUCLEAR
STATE WILL NOT BE ALTERED BY EVENTS IN RUSSIA It was reported that Ukrainian Foreign Minister Anatoliy
Zlenko said that the current political crisis in Russia had undermined
support in Ukraine for eliminating nuclear weapons on its territory.[1]
Although the government remains committed to approving the NPT, he indicated
that there was growing parliamentary opposition to the treaty.[1] The following
day, Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk said that Ukraine's intention
to become a non-nuclear state could not be altered by events in Russia.[2]
[1] Washington Post, 3/25/93, "Ukraine is Loath to
Yield Nuclear Arms." [2] "Kravchuk Says Ukraine's Nuclear Status Unchanged," Reuters,
3/25/93.
3/93:IT IS NOT OBLIGATORY FOR UKRAINE TO BE A
NON-NUCLEAR STATE Bohdan M. Horyn, Deputy Chairman of the Rada's Foreign Affairs
Committee and the Military Affairs Committee said that Ukraine "has the
right to decide to be a nuclear or a non-nuclear State" and that commitments
to become non-nuclear "were voiced as intentions, not obligations."
[Steven Erlanger, "Ukraine And Arms Accords: Kyiv Reluctant
To Say, `I Do," New York Times, 3/31/93.]
2/11/93:UKRAINE WILL CUT NUCLEAR ARSENAL IN PROPORTION
TO RUSSIAN CUTS It was reported that Vyacheslav Chornovil, chairman of the
Ukrainian Rukh (Movement) Party, said that Ukraine should cut its nuclear
arsenal in proportion to the cuts made by Russia and the United States.
[Kyivskiye vedomosti, 2/11/93, p. 3.]
2/6/93:GREEN PARTY IS THE ONLY ORGANIZATION SUPPORTING
DISARMAMENT INTERFAX reported that the only political organization in
Ukraine to support total nuclear disarmament is the `Green' party.
[Kyivskiye vedomosti, 2/11/93, p. 3.]
1/30/93:OPERATIONAL CONTROL OVER UKRAINIAN NUCLEAR
WEAPONS CEDED TO CIS JOINT STRATEGIC FORCES COMMAND Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk stated that the nuclear
weapons on Ukrainian territory belong to Ukraine, but operational control
over them has been ceded to the CIS Joint Strategic Forces Command.
[Rossiyskiye vesti, 4/14/93, p. 7. For a discussion
of the technical barriers to Ukrainian control over the nuclear weapons
on its territory see Virginia Foran, "Ukraine's Creeping Nuclear Possession,"
NNN BULLETIN, 5/30/93.]
11/5/92:UKRAINE IS SEEKING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
FOR GIVING UP NUCLEAR WEAPONS Ukrainian First Deputy Prime Minister Ihor Yukhnovskyi reportedly
said his country should seek compensation from the world's nuclear powers
for giving up warheads containing fissile material. His view was echoed
by Prime Minister Leonid Kuchma who stated that Ukraine had the right to
expect more financial assistance from the West in exchange for giving up
its nuclear weapons.
["Ukraine To Seek Compensation For Nuclear Warheads," Reuters,
11/5/92.]
11/92:UKRAINE WILL BECOME NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE
ZONE BUT NOT BY SELLING NUCLEAR WARHEADS According to First Deputy Prime Minister Ihor Yukhnovsky,
Ukraine will try to become a nuclear-weapon-free zone by selling off its
nuclear weapons to the highest bidder. However, one week later Ukrainian
Defense Minister Kostyantyn Morozov stressed to a visiting NATO delegation
that Ukraine does not intend to sell nuclear warheads to anyone.
[China Radio International (Beijing), 11/11/92, in "Ukraine's
Willingness To Sell Nukes Noted," JPRS-TND-92-044, 11/24/92, p. 4; and
ITAR-TASS (Moscow), 11/17/92, in "Ukraine Stresses No Sale Of Nuclear Weapons."JPRS-TND-92-044,
11/24/92, p. 27.]
12/29/91: LEADERS OF FOUR REPUBLICS AGREED TO JOINT CONTROL
OVER NUCLEAR ARSENALS The leaders of Kazakhstan, Belarus, Russia and Ukraine issued
the Almaty Declaration on Strategic Forces in which they agree to joint
control over nuclear arsenals of the former Soviet Union.
[Kazakh fact sheet to the UN Conference on Disarmament, Geneva,
6/95, p.1.]
