I’m aware that it’s illegal to put any kind of weapon in space, for the sake of the explanation assume there’s no legal reason why not.
My Grug Smash brain has me wondering that if nuclear weapons are so difficult to properly dispose of, surely the easiest option would be to set them off somewhere where they can’t cause any damage.
In: Physics
Several reasons:
– The risk. Rockets sometimes go boom on launch or in atmosphere. When carrying a large amount of radioactive material, that’s bad.
– Cost. Rocket launches are really expensive. Nukes themselves all you have to do is dismantle them and then go bury the radioactive material under a bunch of concrete somewhere where
– Desire: No one with nukes wants to give them up. Countries that have had possession of nukes that gave them up are mainly the USSR states which would have struggled to maintain them anyway. These are Ukraine, since invaded by Russia, Belarus, which remains stuck inside the orbit of Russia, and Kazakhstan, which the Russians are claiming is not a state and might be about to pull another Crimea on.
The only other country which gave up nukes IIRC is South Africa, because they didn’t want the blacks to have them.
Iraq gave up non-nuclear WMDs and was subsequently invaded under the false pretence of having WMDs. Libya was broadly complying with getting rid of its WMDs and similarly got invaded by proxy.
Generally, having nukes is a great place to be for a country, and giving them up makes it far more likely you are invaded. Even if others agree to guarantee your safety in exchange, that’s almost certainly a lie.
Latest Answers