The date is 14 December, 1994. American President Bill Clinton, Russian President Boris Yeltsin and Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk gleefully shake hands in Moscow for international media to capture. They are celebrating a historical trilateral agreement, The Budapest Memorandum, that will shape the future of nuclear proliferation.

On the dawn of its independence in 1991, Ukraine woke up with the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal. Nearly 2,000 strategic soviet warheads sat in the country, as the international community feared the number of nuclear armed states would double, if not triple, in the coming decades. The Budapest Memorandum was supposed to be a deal that curbed nuclear proliferation, while assuring non-nuclear states would enjoy peace and security, but its 30-year legacy tells a different story.

The agreement stipulates that Ukraine gives up all of its nuclear weapons, in exchange for security “assurances” from both Moscow and Washington. Russia violated the memorandum with the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, and again in 2022 with the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The United States has not intervened on behalf of the Ukrainians themselves, but has provided inconsistent support through weapons, sanctions and rhetoric.

What seemed like a win at the time, The Budapest Memorandum has underlain U.S. foreign policy in the following decades. Today, hypocrisy and inconsistency threaten to reverse the trend of nuclear non-proliferation that has largely persisted since the end of the cold war.

The Weaponization of Destruction, En Masse

There has been exhaustive reporting of the lies and manipulation of the (George W.) Bush administration leading up to the Iraq war. The 2003 invasion was justified on the basis that Saddam Hussein possessed, or was going to possess “weapons of mass destruction”(WMDS). The intelligence that Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and other top cabinet members leaned on to come to this conclusion was biased at best, fabricated at worst.

The years of ensuing war would have wide-reaching consequences, including the precedent of nuclear proliferation among non-western aligned states. Whether the U.S. believed their own intelligence is up for debate, but the dismantling of Iraq sent a message around the world, and other countries took notice.

George Bush’s infamous “Mission Accomplished” speech. 1 May, 2003. 

Gaddafi’s Gambit

Colonel Muammar Gaddafi took control of Libya in 1969, and by the 1980s he had acquired an advanced chemical weapons arsenal, largely through Soviet assistance. His ambitions did not stop there, seeing a nuclear armed Israel as an existential threat to the Arab world, Gaddafi wanted Libya to have their own arsenal. Israel acquired nuclear weapons in the 1960s, but has never publicly acknowledged their existence, and is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Intelligence is murky on how close Libya actually came to producing a weapon, but investigations revealed a covert smuggling network that brought uranium and centrifuges into the country, key elements of a weapons program.

In 1996, under the Clinton administration, Congress passed the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA). As reprisal for the countries nuclear programs and support for Middle Eastern islamic militia organizations, the U.S. cut off all trade and investment. The Bush administration not only continued sanctions against Libya, but applied pressure rhetorically. In 2001, after the 9/11 attacks, Bush told Libya’s foreign minister “either you get rid of your weapons of mass destruction or [the United States] will personally destroy them and destroy everything with no discussion” (Cigar 2012).

Muammar Gaddafi, ruler of Libya from 1969-2011

NATO Negotiations

Whether or not Gaddafi believed him before, the 2003 invasion of Iraq showed that Bush’s words were not just an empty threat. Just a few months later, Gaddafi made a surprising announcement: Libya would be dismantling its WMD program, and even went as far to give the U.S. government names of the centrifuge suppliers that it worked with. The next couple of years saw Libyan documents and equipment related to the nuclear program shipped out of the country. Gaddafi’s decision was praised by many in the west, but criticized by leaders from the Arab world, who feared regional dominance by the Israelis.

Despite some sanctions relief, Gaddafi himself grew disillusioned with the west, frustrated that giving up his nuclear program did not bring better relations with the United States. At least, Gaddafi had thought, he had bought his own survival and the regime change coalition that was destabilizing Iraq and Afghanistan would stay out of Libya.

On 19 March, 2011, NATO forces fired over 100 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMs) across Libya, in support of the anti-Gaddafi forces in the ongoing civil war. NATO’s intervention marked the beginning of the end for Gaddafi. The 7,000+ bombing runs allowed for the National Transitional Council to win the civil war, and kill Gaddafi in October of 2011.

The crimes of Gaddafi and his regime were numerous and reprehensible, but his saga sets a dangerous precedent. He gave up his nuclear ambitions to appease the west, and NATO still made sure he ended up dead in a drain pipe.

The JCPOA Light Switch: On and Then Off

With an atomic Libya out of the question, the international community had their eyes on another potential addition to the list of nuclear armed states. Iran seemed to be closing in on a bomb, and western leaders were concerned. Through cooperation with Russia and China, Iran had possessed a civilian nuclear program for decades, but committed to not developing a weapons program through the NPT. Between 2002-2009, western intelligence uncovered multiple covert nuclear weapons facilities across Iran, prompting discourse around Iran’s “breakout time”, the time it would take Iran to build a bomb, should they attempt to do so.

Obama’s Breakthrough

After years of painstaking negotiations by the Obama administration, an agreement to limit Iran’s nuclear weapons was reached on 14 July, 2015. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the “Iran Nuclear Deal”, was officially a pact between Iran, the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, China and Russia.

The deal stipulated that Iran would receive sanctions relief from the U.S., United Nations and European Union, and in return would constrain their nuclear program through restrictions on centrifuges, uranium enrichment levels and more intensive inspections and monitoring from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Critics of the deal argued that sanctions relief would allow for Iran to further destabilize the Middle East through their proxy militia groups.

Obama announces the signing of the JCPOA

Trump’s Breakoff

Donald Trump had been an outspoken critic of the JCPOA for years and promised to renegotiate the deal throughout his 2016 campaign. Despite this, the Trump administration itself found no evidence that Iran had violated the deal in mid-2017. Only a year later Trump decided to withdraw the U.S. from the deal, re-implementing the sanctions regime on Iran.

Critics point to Trump’s personal disdain for Obama, and repeated pressure from Benjamin Netanyahu as core reasons for the policy reversal. By 2019, Iran began to stockpile and enrich uranium well beyond levels allowed by the JCPOA.

Fury, Flames and War

The Trump administration’s withdrawal from the JCPOA saw a steady rise in tensions between Iran, Israel and the United States over the following years. In 2020, Trump ordered the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, a top member of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, considered by some to be the second most powerful person in Iran. Later in the year, Israel also assassinated a top nuclear scientist, possibly handicapping Iran’s ability to build a bomb in the short term, but increasing their desire to do so in the long term.

Iran hit back directly and indirectly, through their proxy groups of Hezbollah, Hamas and to a lesser extent the Houthi Rebels. There were many tit-for-tat attacks between Israel, Iran and the U.S., but it was a ballistic missile attack on U.S. bases in Western Iraq, and the October 7th attacks, perpetrated by Hamas in Israel, that made headlines.

Operation Midnight Hammer

Israel’s destruction of the entire Gaza population, civilians and Hamas alike, along with constant attacks (very much indiscriminate as well) in Southern Lebanon, left Iranian proxy groups weakened. With Iran’s economy squeezed to the brink of collapse due to sanctions, and country-wide protests against the government, Israel saw an opportunity to topple the regime.

Netanyahu had been lobbying about the need to strike Iran and its nuclear sites for years, and Trump’s second term offered him a willing partner. In June of 2025, the Trump administration ordered a strike on three key Iranian nuclear facilities. Six B-2 bombers dropped dozens of bunker-buster bombs on sites at Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz. An aircraft carrier in the region also fired 30 TLAMs at the sites. Iran responded with a restrained attack on an U.S. base in Qatar.

(Deparment of War map of Operation Midnight Hammer)

Trump claimed the nuclear sites were “completely and totally obliterated”, but expert analysis, and a leaked DIA memo, showed the sites were damaged, but not destroyed. Whether the Iranian nuclear program was significantly set back or not, the post-JCPOA saga gives the Iranians a clear reason to not trust America, and work towards a bomb.

Operation Epic Fury

Since 28 February, 2026, the U.S. and Israel have been in open-ended war with Iran. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was killed by an airstrike in his Tehran compound. A separate TLAM strike hit a girls school in Southern Iran, killing more than 100. Currently, Ali’s son, Mojtaba has taken the title of Supreme Leader, but the future of the regime is uncertain.

Iran’s response has been destructive, but it is not the U.S. who has seen the damage first-hand. Iran’s drone and ballistic missile program does not have the range to threaten the U.S. directly. Rather, Iran has targeted gulf countries, particularly those with U.S. military presence. In the weeks following the initial attack, Iranian drones and missiles have hit Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, The U.A.E and Israel.

Smoke rises over Tehran after an airstrike – 02 March, 2026

Not My First Gulf War

The gulf Arab economies rely heavily on oil supply chains, maritime shipping and tourism. The presence of the U.S. military is designed to keep these countries safe, but the attack on Iran has made them a target. The reality is that Washington has prioritized its partnership with Israel, putting gulf civilians, infrastructure and governments at risk, and it may force the gulf states to pivot towards hard power of their own.

Gulf states have been ramping up military expenditures, seeking to expand defense partnerships and acquiring advanced weapons systems, but the most relevant signal in the changing of the post cold-war international order is Saudi Arabia’s open ambition to acquire a nuclear bomb.

Mohamed bin Salman, the Saudi crown prince, said “if Iran does develop a bomb, we will have to get one”, in a 2023 Fox News interview. Saudi Arabia’s civilian nuclear program is advanced, and it isn’t hard to imagine a scenario where they ramp up uranium enrichment to produce a bomb. Saudi Arabia could open the regional floodgates of proliferation, with Turkey, The U.A.E, Egypt and Qatar looking for a nuclear deterrent as well.

The Genie is Out of The Bottle

The Trump administration’s isolationist tendencies, particularly in its second term, has fundamentally reshaped international relations. Many former U.S. allies are more willing to work with other partners on trade, economic and diplomatic issues, particularly China. However, the reversal on post-cold war non-proliferation has been decades in the making. The U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran are only the latest example of inconsistency and hypocrisy in U.S. foreign policy.

The empty promises of The Budapest Memorandum left Ukraine without nuclear weapons and without a U.S. security guarantee that could have prevented a Russian invasion. At the same time, the wholesale destruction of Libya and Iraq, especially compared to the relative uninvolvement in nuclear armed Pakistan, has sent the message that there is only one true deterrent. U.S. foreign policy has been chipping away at the trend of non-proliferation for some time, but the war in Iran may turbocharge the process.

While Nuclear war may not be imminent yet, once the wheels of proliferation began to turn, they are not easily stopped.