Can French nuclear weapons protect the whole EU?
French President Emmanuel Macron has announced plans to meet with his European partners to discuss the possibility of extending the French nuclear umbrella to other countries. France has been the EU's only nuclear power since the Brexit. Europe's press examines the pros and cons.
Credible deterrence
Nuclear expert Benoît Grémare explains in The Conversation:
“As Macron has indicated, France could respond by stationing nuclear weapons in Eastern European countries, with the idea of eventually replacing the United States. This French nuclear umbrella would give concrete form to Europe's strategic autonomy with the deployment of fighter jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons. This would be a sign of political solidarity in Europe and make Moscow's calculations more complicated. The visible presence of these aircraft in Eastern Europe could deter Russia from attacking the countries there with conventional means, as such an attack could provoke a French nuclear response on behalf of Europe.”
A vital message to Moscow and Washington
The Süddeutsche Zeitung stresses the importance of the discussion:
“One thing is clear: there will be no quick and comprehensive replacement for the US protective shield. Especially since the French offer raises countless complex technical and political questions - and would vanish into thin air if Marine Le Pen were elected president. In these dangerous times, it would be fatal to convey the impression that Europe is entering a state of shocked paralysis. The joint initiative by Merz and Macron is therefore a necessary signal - both to Moscow and to Washington.”
One step at a time
Aftonbladet sees such discussions as premature:
“The US has not left Nato. US troops have not been withdrawn from Europe. And we don't actually know whether this will happen at all. ... For now, our most important asset will continue to be our soft power - let's protect it. Clearly, soft power has its limits. And this is why the rearmament currently taking place across our continent is crucial. As long as the US remains in Nato and is prepared to honour its commitments, any rearmament should focus on conventional armed forces. Should the US leave Nato or start to waver on Article 5, the situation would change. But we are not there. Yet.”