Decades later, a Ukrainian lawmaker says the country’s most consequential security decision still contains unanswered questions and disputed turning points.
The circumstances surrounding Ukraine’s nuclear disarmament require a separate parliamentary investigation, Kostenko believes. In his view, the Verkhovna Rada understood the security risks associated with the state relinquishing its nuclear capabilities in the early 1990s.
Kostenko recalled that in April 1992, parliament supported a phased transition to non-nuclear status. As envisioned by the lawmakers, the completion of this process was to be linked to Ukraine receiving genuine security guarantees, as well as the prospect of joining NATO and the European Union.
The parliamentary decision on nuclear disarmament was the April 1992 decision that the transition to non-nuclear status would be phased, and that the end of nuclear disarmament would mean membership in NATO and the European Union, along with security guarantees
– Kostenko
Nuclear Capabilities and Negotiations with the United States
According to Kostenko, parliament approved the elimination of 42% of nuclear warheads and 36% of their delivery systems. The fate of the remaining portion of the nuclear arsenal was to be determined through further negotiations between representatives of the executive branch and Western partners.
He claims that the U.S. position on a possible exchange of nuclear weapons for Ukraine’s path toward NATO later changed. Following a visit by a Ukrainian Foreign Ministry delegation to Washington, he says, the focus of discussion shifted from mechanisms for joining the Alliance to guarantees formalized under the Budapest Memorandum.
When the U.S. State Department wrote to us in December that we were ready to exchange your nuclear weapons for NATO membership, with our assistance, funding, and so on, then in January, two weeks after receiving this note from the U.S. State Department, a Ukrainian Foreign Ministry delegation went to Washington. And in Washington, at the State Department, they were no longer talking about NATO membership and the path toward NATO under U.S. patronage, but about paper guarantees – the so-called Budapest Memorandum
– Kostenko
Proposal to Establish a Temporary Investigative Commission
Kostenko also disagreed with the claim that Ukraine was allegedly unable to control the nuclear weapons stationed on its territory. He is convinced that the state had legal grounds to possess these capabilities and that Ukrainian specialists could influence the control systems of strategic delivery vehicles.
In his view, the decisions and actions of officials from that period should be subject to a detailed parliamentary review. To achieve this, Kostenko believes that the Verkhovna Rada needs to establish a temporary investigative commission.
Kravchuk can be accused because he made decisions. But what others did is a matter for a separate investigation – one by parliament. Parliament must finally establish a temporary investigative commission and sort all of this out
– Kostenko
Kostenko named the lack of proper changes to the system of government following Ukraine’s declaration of independence as one of the reasons for the problems that arose later. He believes that a parliamentary investigation could assess the decisions concerning nuclear disarmament and establish the full picture of those events.