Trump’s Interest in Ukraine’s Nuclear Plants: Kyiv’s Response Amidst Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Trump Floats U.S. Ownership of Ukrainian Nuclear Plants: A Risky Proposition?

March 21, 2025

Kyiv, ukraine

A proposal by former President Donald Trump to have the U.S. take ownership of Ukrainian nuclear power plants has sparked controversy and raised serious questions about nuclear security, energy independence, and the ongoing conflict with Russia. The idea, reportedly suggested during a phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has been met with skepticism and concern, particularly in light of the Chernobyl disaster and the current occupation of the Zaporizhzhia plant.

Echoes of Chernobyl: A Nation’s Nuclear Trauma

For Ukrainians, the word “Chernobyl” evokes a visceral reaction, a reminder of the catastrophic 1986 nuclear disaster that remains etched in thier collective memory. The explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, far exceeding the impact of the atomic bombs dropped on hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II, released vast amounts of radiation, rendering a large exclusion zone uninhabitable for generations. The specter of another nuclear incident looms large, fueling anxieties about the safety and security of Ukraine’s nuclear facilities.

Volodymyr Robovyk, one of the workers who responded to the Chernobyl disaster, described the devastating health consequences he endured: For three months, I couldn’t get up, I could barely eat. his words serve as a stark reminder of the human cost of nuclear accidents and the long-term impact on survivors.

the Proposal: A Solution or a Seizure?

During a phone conversation that took place this Wednesday, Trump suggested to Zelenskyy that turning over ukraine’s nuclear power plants to the U.S.would be the optimal way to safeguard them. American ownership of those plants could be the best protection for that infrastructure, Trump stated, adding that Washington could provide valuable expertise in managing these facilities.

Zelenskyy later clarified that the discussion focused primarily on the Zaporizhzhia plant, currently under Russian control. We only talked about one power plant that is under Russian occupation, zelenskyy said. however, he firmly stated that Ukraine has no intention of ceding ownership of the plant to the U.S.If they want to take it from the Russians,invest in it,modernise it,that’s another matter. We’re not talking about the change of ownership.

Ukrainian Fears: Provocation and Ownership

Trump’s proposal has triggered concerns among Ukrainians, who fear a potential Russian provocation, especially if Ukraine attempts to regain control of the Zaporizhzhia plant. Ihor Romanenko, former deputy head of Ukraine’s general staff, voiced his concerns, stating, Of course, there is such danger. He drew a parallel to the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam in June 2023, which disrupted the water supply to the Zaporizhzhia plant. Kyiv has accused Moscow of deliberately destroying the dam, labeling it a “war crime” and an act of “ecocide.”

Romanenko also suggested that Trump’s proposal could be seen as an attempt to exploit Ukraine’s vulnerable position. Our memory works fine. We remember everything that belongs to Ukraine and will fight for what is ours.

Conversely, a former Zaporizhzhia plant engineer, speaking anonymously, downplayed the likelihood of a Russian attack on the plant. I don’t think that in this situation [the russians] will resort to deliberately damaging the station’s parts, as the station is a subject of negotiations and haggling.The better its condition is the higher is the price they will get when they’re swapping it for something – if they’re swapping it. This perspective suggests that the plant’s value as a bargaining chip might deter Russia from causing irreparable damage.

The Mood at Zaporizhzhia: Collaboration and Uncertainty

The former engineer also revealed that Ukrainian staff members who are collaborating with Rosatom, the Russian state nuclear corporation managing the plant, initially reacted with anxiety to Trump’s proposal. However, their mood shifted to elation when it became clear that the U.S. would not use military force to seize the plant.

Rosatom has reportedly promised to relocate these collaborators to Russia or to the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant in Turkey if Ukraine retakes zaporizhzhia. However, concerns remain about potential negligence by Russian forces guarding the plant. A 2023 report highlighted how Chechen guards stationed at the plant were disregarding safety protocols, perhaps increasing the risk of an incident that could release radioactive materials. If their negligence results in damage to one of the reactors or spent fuel storage facilities, an explosion similar to a “dirty” atomic bomb could occur – and spew a radioactive cloud over Ukraine and parts of Eastern Europe, another staffer told Al Jazeera.

Ukraine’s Nuclear Dependence and Energy Security

Prior to 2022, nuclear power generated nearly half of Ukraine’s electricity. The loss of access to coal mines in the Donbas region further underscored the importance of nuclear energy. The ongoing conflict has seen Russia target Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, highlighting the country’s vulnerability and the strategic importance of its nuclear power plants. Putin tentatively agreed to stop hitting it only earlier this week.

Following Trump’s suggestion, then-Energy Secretary Chris Wright stated that his agency possesses immense technical expertise to operate the plants. I don’t think that requires boots on the ground, he added. However, Wright’s background in engineering and natural gas raises questions about his familiarity with Soviet-era reactor technology.

Historically, Ukraine has relied on Russian-manufactured uranium rods to fuel its reactors. In 2005, Kyiv began transitioning to fuel supplied by Westinghouse, a U.S.-based company.However, in 2012, Westinghouse fuel rods damaged protective components in two reactors at the South Ukrainian power station. Rosatom experts were subsequently called in to resolve the issue. Westinghouse redesigned the rods, and no further incidents were reported.

This incident underscores the complexities of operating nuclear facilities and the need for specialized expertise,particularly when dealing with aging reactors and transitioning to new fuel sources.

Aging Reactors and Corruption Concerns

International observers have expressed concerns about the safety of Ukraine’s aging reactors. Bankwatch, an environmental group, has labeled them “zombie reactors” and urged their closure. However, Petro Kotin, head of energoatom, Ukraine’s nuclear energy monopoly, has defended the safety and lifespan of the reactors. There are also widespread concerns about alleged corruption at Energoatom amid non-clear deals and the procurement of cheap spare parts.

“They get crazy kickbacks. This is a team of marauders,” Olga Kosharna, a nuclear safety expert, told Al Jazeera in 2021.

What if there is an equipment failure if you bought the wrong spare part? she said.

Implications for the U.S. and Global security

Trump’s proposal raises important questions about the U.S.’s role in global nuclear security. Taking ownership of ukrainian nuclear plants would entangle the U.S. more deeply in the conflict with Russia and could set a precedent for future interventions in other countries’ energy sectors. It also raises concerns about the potential financial and logistical burdens of managing these facilities, as well as the potential risks associated with nuclear accidents or security breaches.

From a domestic perspective, U.S. taxpayers might balk at the prospect of funding the operation and maintenance of Ukrainian nuclear plants, especially given the ongoing debates about energy policy and infrastructure spending within the U.S. The proposal also raises questions about the potential impact on the U.S. nuclear industry, both in terms of competition and the potential for technology transfer.

Ultimately, the future of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants remains uncertain.The ongoing conflict, coupled with concerns about safety, security, and corruption, presents significant challenges. Any solution will require careful consideration of the risks and benefits,and also the long-term implications for Ukraine,the U.S., and the international community.

Recent Developments

As of today, March 21, 2025, the situation at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant remains precarious. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) continues to monitor the plant closely, raising concerns about the potential for a nuclear accident. Negotiations between Ukraine and Russia regarding the plant’s future have stalled, and the risk of military activity in the area remains high.

The U.S. government has not formally responded to Trump’s proposal, but experts suggest that it is unlikely to gain traction given the significant political and logistical hurdles involved.

Reporting from Kyiv

What are the concerns Ukranians have regarding U.S.ownership of their nuclear plants, considering the historical context of the Chernobyl disaster?

Interview: The Future of Ukraine’s Nuclear plants

Archyde News: Welcome, everyone.Today, we’re discussing the controversial proposal of U.S. ownership of Ukrainian nuclear plants. With us is Dr. Anya Petrova, a leading expert in nuclear energy policy. Dr. Petrova, thank you for joining us.

Dr. Petrova: Thank you for having me.

Archyde News: The proposal, as you know, has sparked a wide range of reactions.From your perspective, what are the most critical aspects we need to consider regarding this potential shift in ownership?

Dr. Petrova: The core concerns revolve around several intertwined issues. First and foremost is the ongoing conflict. Any action affecting the zaporizhzhia plant, currently under Russian control, carries an inherent risk of escalation. There’s also the historical context of Chernobyl, deeply ingrained in the Ukrainian psyche, which magnifies fears about nuclear safety.

Archyde News: Safety and security seem paramount. Former Energy Secretary Chris Wright has said the U.S. has the expertise to manage these plants. Do you agree? And what are the specific challenges the U.S. would face,especially with the Soviet-era reactor technology used in Ukraine?

Dr. Petrova: While the U.S. undoubtedly possesses meaningful nuclear expertise, including from U.S.-based Westinghouse, operating Soviet-era reactors presents a unique set of challenges.These reactors have different safety protocols and requirements compared to Western technologies. Moreover, the fuel source for those reactors is Russian-manufactured uranium rods. A transition or integration of that technology could require a deep understanding, specialized knowledge, and additional steps. It is not an easy switch and requires strong leadership and skilled engineers.

Archyde News: Beyond technical challenges, what are the political and economic considerations?

Dr. Petrova: Politically, this proposal could be perceived as a provocation by Russia, perhaps escalating the conflict. Economically, the U.S. taking ownership would involve significant financial investment for maintenance, upgrades, and security. The U.S. government would likely incur the responsibility, and taxpayers might question allocating funds to operate facilities in a war-torn area.

Archyde News: There’s also the question of corruption. The article mentions issues at the nuclear power plants. How could U.S. involvement potentially address or exacerbate these concerns?

dr. Petrova: U.S. involvement could, in theory, bring greater transparency and accountability, if the U.S. can successfully root out corruption. Though, this would require a robust oversight mechanism and a zero-tolerance policy for unethical practices – areas in which past performance offers mixed results. There is also a risk of resistance from established interests which currently benefit from corruption, who might try to make their own deals, as the article states.

Archyde News: Looking ahead, what do you see as the most probable outcomes of this situation? And what alternative approaches could be considered to ensure the safety and security of Ukraine’s nuclear plants?

Dr.Petrova: Given the complexity and potential risks, it’s unlikely that this proposal will move forward. Alternative approaches could include increased international collaboration,greater support for the IAEA’s monitoring efforts and more investment in the future of these nuclear plants. This, in tandem with security guarantees from international partners, might be a more viable path to assure safeguards for Ukrainian nuclear facilities without taking ownership.

Archyde News: Very insightful. thinking about the Ukrainian people and their historical context. Do you think the U.S. should be willing to own their plants,given their historical context with the Chernobyl disaster?

Dr. Petrova: The Ukranians were the initial inhabitants and were devastated by Chernobyl.The question now, in light of the devastation, is would more American involvement provide them safety and security or would it put them in further harm’s way?