ANALYSIS: US Demands $350 Billion From Ukraine, But Its Nuclear Arsenal Cost a Trillion

The Trump administration is demanding that Ukraine return $350 billion in aid provided by the previous administration – despite the US’ own numbers showing that the actual amount was closer to $100 billion, with half of it spent on American weapons, meaning much of the money never left US defense companies.But there’s a bigger question: Would Ukraine have ever needed this aid if the US hadn’t stripped it of its nuclear arsenal in 1994?

Back then, Washington pushed Kyiv to give up nuclear weapons worth hundreds of billions of dollars, while also saving billions more on US defense programs that would have been required to monitor and counter a nuclear-armed Ukraine.Using data from SIPRI (1994), we can calculate the full scale of Ukraine’s nuclear forces at the time and estimate how much the US saved by pressuring Ukraine to give up its deterrent.

ICBM LaunchersAccording to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), in 1994, Ukraine possessed 176 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launchers, including 130 SS-19 “Stiletto” missiles and 46 SS-24 “Scalpel” missiles.

Determining the precise production cost of the SS-19 is challenging due to the lack of publicly available Soviet-era financial data. However, modern ICBMs provide a useful reference point. The Russian RS-28 Sarmat, for instance, has an estimated unit cost of approximately $35 million, while China’s DongFeng-31 (1985) was reportedly produced at around $12 million per missile. Considering inflation and technological development, an estimated production cost of $12 million for the SS-19 during its time seems reasonable.

The SS-24 Scalpel, being a more advanced missile with a higher payload capacity and improved guidance systems, would have been significantly more expensive to produce.

Adjusting for inflation and technological factors, a conservative estimate places the SS-19’s production cost at around $25 million per unit, while the SS-24 likely cost closer to $50 million. Given Ukraine’s arsenal at the time, this brings the total estimated value of these ICBMs to:

(130 × $25 million) + (46 × $50 million) = $5.5 billion. (2025) ICBM Warheads In 1994, Ukraine possessed the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world, with an estimated 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads.

Determining the exact production cost of a strategic nuclear warhead is inherently difficult due to the classified nature of defense budgets and the technological complexities involved.

Depending on yield and design sophistication, estimates suggest that the cost per warhead could range anywhere from $20 million- $50 million and up to $100 million.For comparison:

• The W87-1 warhead, part of a U.S. modernization program, was estimated by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in 2018 to cost between $8.6 billion and $14.8 billion for an undisclosed number of units. The per-unit cost varies depending on total production.
• The B61-12 nuclear bomb, a modern U.S. gravity bomb, has an estimated program cost of $9 billion for 400 units, averaging $22.5 million per bomb.

Given these estimates, a conservative valuation for a strategic nuclear warhead in 1994 would be around $30-40 million per unit. Based on this figure, the total estimated value of Ukraine’s 1,900 warheads would have been:

1,900 × $40 million = $76 billion (1994 value).$159.6 billion (2025 value)

Tactical Nuclear Warheads

In addition to its vast arsenal of strategic nuclear weapons, Ukraine also inherited a significant stockpile of tactical nuclear warheads following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Estimates of the total number of these warheads vary widely depending on the source, ranging from 600 to 2,400 units.

Determining the precise cost of a tactical nuclear warhead is complex, as prices fluctuate based on yield, design, and deployment factors. However, based on the estimated costs of similar Cold War-era weapons systems, a single tactical nuclear warhead in 1994 was likely valued at approximately $1–2 million.

For calculation purposes, assuming an average cost of $2 million per warhead, we arrive at the following estimates:

• 600 warheads × $2 million = $1.2 billion
• 2,400 warheads × $2 million = $4.8 billion

Adjusted for inflation and technological valuation, a mid-range estimate places the total worth of Ukraine’s tactical nuclear arsenal in 1994 at approximately $3 billion, which would be roughly $6.3 billion in today’s dollars.

Kh-55 Cruise MissilesThe Kh-55 is an air-launched cruise missile originally developed by the Soviet Union and later inherited by Ukraine. Designed for strategic bombing missions, each missile carried a nuclear warhead and had an operational range of approximately 2,500 kilometers.

Determining the precise cost of the Kh-55 in 1994 is difficult due to limited Soviet-era financial data. However, according to Forbes, the modern price of a Russian Kh-55 missile is estimated to be around $2 million. Adjusting for inflation and technological advancements, this suggests that the production cost of a Kh-55 in 1994 was approximately $1 million.

By 1994, Ukraine possessed 600 Kh-55 missiles, deployed on its Tu-95 and Tu-160 strategic bombers. 575 missiles were sent to Russia, while around 30 missiles were reportedly transferred to Iran and China, according to Sipri (1994). Based on this valuation, the total estimated worth of Ukraine’s Kh-55 stockpile was:

600 × $1 million = $600 million. (1994)$1.2 billion. (2025)Strategic Bombers (Tu-95, Tu-160)According to SIPRI (1994), Ukraine possessed 42 strategic bombers, comprising:

• 19 Tu-160 “Blackjack” bombers
• 21 Tu-95 “Bear-H” bombers

Tu-160 “Blackjack”

The Tu-160, the most advanced strategic bomber of its time, was a supersonic, nuclear-capable aircraft with unmatched speed and payload capacity. The estimated cost per unit varies widely depending on the source, ranging from $270 million to $575 million. Using an average estimate of $400 million per aircraft, the total valuation of Ukraine’s 19 Tu-160 bombers would be:

19 × $400 million = $7.6 billion

Tu-95 “Bear-H”

The Tu-95, though an older design, remained a key component of strategic aviation. While already out of production by 1994, its estimated original cost was approximately $26 million per unit.

21 × $26 million = $546 million

Adjusting for inflation, the Tu-95 fleet’s estimated value in today’s terms would be around $1.1 billion.

Total: $8.7 billion (adjusted for inflation)

Tu-160 fleet: $7.6 billionTu-95 fleet: $1.1 billion

Missile InfrastructureBeyond nuclear warheads, missiles, and strategic bombers, Ukraine also inherited a massive missile infrastructure essential for maintaining and deploying its nuclear arsenal. This included:

• 190 metric tons of enriched uranium
• 45 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium
• ICBM launchers and silos
• Strategic airbases for nuclear-capable bombers
•  

The sheer scale and complexity of this infrastructure made it one of the most valuable military assets of the post-Soviet era. Taking into account the cost of nuclear materials, launch facilities, and strategic airfields, its total estimated value in 1994 was approximately $50 billion, which is around $110 billion today.

How Much the US Saved by Denuclearizing UkraineHad Ukraine retained its nuclear weapons, the United States would have faced the burden of significantly expanding its missile defense systems in Europe. This would have likely included deploying Aegis Ashore installations and bolstering NATO’s military presence.Currently, a single Aegis Ashore system costs approximately 220 billion yen, and by 2025, inflation-adjusted estimates place the price at $1.96 billion. Deploying between three and five of these systems across Poland, Romania, and the Baltic states would have required an upfront investment of $5.88-9.8 billion, with an additional $200-300 million in annual maintenance costs.Beyond defense spending, a potential war between a nuclear Ukraine and Russia could have drawn the US into a large-scale military intervention, comparable to Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Back in 2001, that operation cost $100 billion annually – a figure that, adjusted for inflation, would reach $210 billion per year by 2025. Over the course of four years of conflict, US expenditures could have surged to $840 billion.In comparison, the cost of Ukraine’s nuclear disarmament was only a fraction of that amount – raising a crucial question:  If the US is now demanding Ukraine repay its debt, should it first settle its own?