from Hacker News

Prime Minister of Poland says country must pursue nuclear weapons

by apsec112 on 3/7/25, 4:06 PM with 28 comments

• by legitster on 3/7/25, 4:24 PM

  This is not a surprise. One of the main points of NATO in the first place is to prevent nuclear proliferation. If the US is going to close its "nuclear umbrella", all of our allies are going to make their own.

  Also, if people are not aware, Poland has the highest % GDP dedicated to military in the Europe, outspending even the US. Their military has bought and stocked up on every single advanced weapon system. It cannot be understated how badly they were treated the USSR and how much they don't want to dragged into the Russian sphere again should Ukraine fall.

• by SAI_Peregrinus on 3/7/25, 5:19 PM

  We've seen several countries give up nuclear weapons & lose their sovereignty to countries with nukes later on. We haven't yet seen a country with nukes lose its sovereignty. Without reliable guarantees from multi-national alliances with nukes the individual countries will want nukes. It's reasonable to assume at this point that nuclear weapons are required to maintain sovereignty, so we should expect substantial nuclear proliferation.

• by perihelions on 3/7/25, 4:19 PM

  This is huge, and confusing. Poland doesn't have any nuclear reactors, or nuclear expertise of any kind. The latency to obtain nuclear weapons—unless some allied country literally gifts them—would presumably be extremely long. AFAIK it also doesn't have long-range missiles, nor any missile industry: hence no credible, modern delivery mechanism.

  Poland is a signatory of the international nonproliferation treaty, although that's merely symbolic because anyone can exit with just 90 days' notice[0].

  Less symbolically, Poland has a Section 123 treaty agreement with the United States[1], which obligates nonproliferation and is tied to literally tens of billions[2] in ongoing commercial nuclear power investments. Granted that in the current political climate, anything could happen; during the ancien régime, this action would (I understand) have triggered automatic US sanctions on nuclear technology—something that'd be stupidly expensive with the amount of nuclear reactors Poland is currently buying from the USA (and from Korea, another 123 signatory).

  [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferatio...

  [1] https://www.energy.gov/nnsa/123-agreements-peaceful-cooperat...

  [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_reactors_in_Euro...

• by sleepyguy on 3/7/25, 4:15 PM

  I would like to see Canada arm itself with Nuclear Weapons. It is the only guarantee the USA/Russia will respect its territorial integrity.

  North Korea has been the perfect example, and soon to be Iran, when it comes to securing yourself from invasion. Ukraine has been a lesson for the entire world, Nuclear Weapons are your only guarantee.

• by casenmgreen on 3/7/25, 4:20 PM

  I wish it wasn't necessary, but it is.

  You can't rely on other countries.

  Be good if Europe could produce a shared deterrent, under article 5-like auspices; the more independent actors you have with nuclear capabilities, the more likely they are to be used.

• by superkuh on 3/7/25, 4:22 PM

  This is the inevitable consequence of the USA not paying it's debts in terms of the Budapest Memorandum anymore. Other countries know they cannot rely on non-military-action-binding treaty arrangements with the USA. And the only other protection is via nuclear weapons (which Ukraine gave up in exachange for protection in the Budapest Memorandum (and other protection agreements with France and China).

• by tyleo on 3/7/25, 4:16 PM

  Of course, there are obvious bad regimes which are more or less left alone because they have them and obvious good ones which are destroyed because they don’t.

  Bad and good as defined by the aggression they express towards neighbors and their own populations.

• by cadamsdotcom on 3/7/25, 8:06 PM

  The sad irony is war can be very profitable for those in the right places.

  Time to invest in companies that produce uranium? What are the ingredients that will be needed for all this re-proliferation, and which companies are in the supply chain?

• by aschearer on 3/7/25, 4:22 PM

  Evidently also planning military training for all men…

• by bananapub on 3/7/25, 4:47 PM

  here's a bbc article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy83r93l208o

  > The prime minister said his government was also "carefully examining" France's proposal to include Europe under its nuclear umbrella.

  > "I would like to know first of all in detail what it means in terms of the authority over these weapons," he said.

  > Tusk pointed out Ukraine was invaded after it got rid of its own nuclear arsenal, adding Warsaw would like to acquire its own nuclear weapons, however remote a possibility that may be.

  > "Today, it is clear that we would be safer if we had our own nuclear arsenal, that is beyond doubt. In any case the road to that would be very long and there would have to be a consensus too," he said.

  also, fuck trump and fuck anyone who thought letting him wreck the modern world was a good idea because it'd make them richer or make it easier to harm groups they don't like.