• halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    They had nukes. They got rid of them in exchange for assurances from Russia that they would leave them alone.

    It’s obviously more complicated than that, but that’s essentially what it boils down to.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I think you got that wrong enough it warrants a correction…

      They gave them up for assurances that Russia and the USA would protect them if they were attacked.

      Edit: that’s why the USA is giving them weapons, they’re honoring the deal, or at least trying to, not 100% sure on specifics, I’m sure it was vague on what protecting them would entail.

      • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        So did you.

        US agreed to bring it before the UNSC, not to protect them. Russia has veto powers.

        '93 Budapest memorandum off the top of my head if anyone wants to look it up and bring the quote forward.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          24 hours ago

          wiki says

          Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they “should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used”.

          what assistance would that not be if not protecting them in some way or another?