As Trump Stirs Doubt, Europeans Debate Their Own Nuclear Deterrent

4 comments

1. We learn it is the only viable deterrent. Not great but that is the world we live in.

   Also Germany with its own nukes. Wcgw

2. There are fears that talking too much about a European replacement, let alone trying to construct one, would only encourage Mr. Trump to withdraw his pledge. Even so, European allies are now engaged in the most serious debate in generations about what Europe’s nuclear defense should be.

   Today France and Britain are the only two Western powers in Europe who possess nuclear weapons.

   The British deterrent depends on American Trident II missiles, launching mechanisms and maintenance, raising at least the question of whether the British government has full authority to launch these weapons.

   French doctrine has always been kept a bit vague, part of the uncertainty that is the heart of deterrence. “We have a pretty good idea what the French will not do, but not such a clear understanding of what they are willing to do,” said Claudia Major, head of trans-Atlantic security studies for the German Marshall Fund.

   Since 2020, Mr. Macron has sometimes spoken of France’s vital national interests as having “a European dimension,” without specifying what that is. Earlier this month, he announced a “strategic debate on using our deterrence to protect our allies on the European continent.”

   The security of neighboring Germany and perhaps Poland would likely qualify as vital French national interests, said Erik Jones, director of the Robert Schuman Center at the European University Institute.

   But it is far from clear that a quick conventional Russian attack on Estonia or Lithuania would prompt a French nuclear threat or response. “The vital interests of France do not reach that far,” he said.

   Then there is the question of the next French president. Should it be Marine Le Pen, the head of the far-right National Rally, she might have a narrower view of French interests. That could undermine the credibility of an extended French nuclear deterrent in the same way that Europeans have become anxious over Mr. Trump’s commitment.

   As Mr. Merz and the Polish leaders suggested, France might also consider “nuclear sharing,” as the Americans now do. There are five European countries that currently host American B61 nuclear bombs and have their own airplanes to deliver them.

   Poland would like to be a sixth. For France to decide to place some of its nuclear weapons and bombers in other countries would be a break with its current doctrine. In any case, France and its president would retain total control over their use.

   Given all the uncertainty, Germany might have to go nuclear itself, said Thorsten Benner, director of the Global Public Policy Institute. “So far talk of a German bomb has been limited to fringe types, but now it becomes more mainstream,” he said. But he prefers discussing nuclear sharing with France, with French bombers on German bases.

3. We should have had EU based nuclear deterrent long time ago. A major reason why we don’t is US pressure. It is insane that we went along with this because everyone who can think ahead knows that Being under someone else’s ‘nuclear umbrella’ is weak deterrence at best. Suppose that Russia goes crazy and decides to wipe The Netherlands of the Map with a Poseidon torpedo and a few Sarmat missiles, let’s say two. The whole population of the netherlands would be a smoldering heap of radioactive glass. The chances that any leader of let’s say the US then decides to retaliate with its own nuclear missiles are zero, as thry would be risking their own population.

4. Russia and the US each have around 5000 nuclear warheads, while the next largest stockpile is China with only 500. France and the UK have less than 300 each, over 10 times fewer than Russia or the US.

   The reason why I’m pointing this out is because the American nuclear umbrella over Europe cannot simply be replaced by a French (or joint British-French) umbrella. They simply have too few nuclear warheads to effectively deter Russia. So, the only way that Europe could truly have its own nuclear deterrent is if they build thousands of new warheads. Suffice to say, both Russia and America would be strongly opposed to that.

Comments are closed.