How easy would be for Country like Germany ,Japan or even Sweden to develop nuclear weapons?.All of those countries have highly sophisticated nuclear industry ,top scientists and in case of Japan- space program(ballistic missiles?).
I’m not sure if I’m missing something about this question… why would you think it would be difficult? Hell, India, Pakistan. and Israel all did it on the sly, and I wouldn’t be surprised if there are more. I’m thinking maybe South Africa has some, but I don’t know if that’s been authoritatively verified.
Dohh! You right .But India ,Pakistan are still very poor and not fully free and democratic countries plus(most important thing) don’t have this bloody history like Germany and Japan does.
Germany ,Japan have very strong economies if they were to have nukes ,US and maybe Russia would not be amused.
South Africa did have nuclear weapons but destroyed them, making them the (I believe) sole nation to give up nuclear weapons.
South Africa working in conjuction with Israel detonated a nuke back in the seventies. With the fall of the afrikanner govt ,and the election of Mandela , South Africa turned over its nuclear arms to the US for diposal.
Declan
South Africa had some, but they voluntarily dismantled their entire nuclear weapons program in the early nineties as the Soviet Union collapsed. More here.
Triple simulpost! But mine had a link, so nyah nyah nyah. 
Not quite. According to my link, there is also Belarus, which inherited 81 nukes when the USSR broke up, but returned them to Russia four years later.
…or maybe five years. :smack:
The Ukraine did so as well. But I’m not sure if I count giving back inherited weapons as being on the same level as destroying weapons you’ve created yourself. Although I guess it could said that the South Africa that destroyed the weapons wasn’t the same South Africa that created them in the first place.
(bolding mine)
“Amused”?
Are you suggesting tht the U.S. ought to be allowed to decide who shall have such weapons and who shall not 
Why would that be?
You know, there are people whw find the possession of nuclear weapons by the U.S.A. and the U.K. to be less than coompletely hilarious. And not at all amusing, in fact.
The Japanese wouldn’t be amused if Japan had nukes either. The Japanese Constitution doesn’t forbid nuclear weapons per se, but it does say that Japan cannot declare war or use force or the threat of force to resolve international conflicts. And seeing as Japan is the only country that’s ever been the victim of nuclear weapons, popular opinion tends to be against them.
OTOH, Japan does have a very well developed nuclear program, and could probably put together a couple nuclear weapons in a matter of months, if they felt it necessary.
The Nuclear Weapons Archive FAQ (used to be at fas.org), has Section 7.5.2 and 7.5.3 devoted to Germany and Japan.
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq7-5.html#germany
(with Japan immediately below)
The thinking goes that both nations have robust nuclear, technical and industrial capacity, and could probably break out and have nuclear weapons quickly. Actually, the FAQ says:
I think it would be prudent to assume that any country with a nuclear power plant has nuclear-weapon capability.
As the example of Israel shows any industrialized country with a population of at least a few million should be able to develop nuclear weapons. The reasons not to do so are political: the major foreign political repercussions, plus also interior politics (it’s not that every country’s electorate would welcome this).
With respect to Germany: Germany is not only a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (which can be left unilaterally, as North Korea has done) but also to the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany - see Article 3 (1) of that treaty. It would not be a good idea for Germany to break a treaty with the US, Britain, France and Russia.