Are proposals for EU nuclear weapons realistic?
#63: With Malcolm Chalmers, Rose Gottemoeller, Liviu Horovitz
The Hundred is a newsletter in which 3 experts answer 1 question in 100 words. You can subscribe for free.
Between Russian aggression and the possibility that Donald Trump could become President of the United States again, there has been some discussion in Europe around the possibility of nuclear weapons for the European Union. But are proposals for a “Eurobomb” realistic? We asked 3 experts.
No. In desperate circumstances, it is possible to imagine individual EU member states breaking their NPT obligations, building their own nuclear arsenals and then ‘assigning’ them to the EU. But these weapons would remain ultimately under national control. For the EU to develop its own nuclear weapons, it would have to become much more like a sovereign state than it is ever likely to be. Until then, France will likely remain the only EU state with its own nuclear arsenal, and will resist any attempt to circumscribe its sovereign right to use this force as it sees appropriate.
No, for two reasons: first, the European Union needs to concentrate on modernizing its defense industrial base and producing the conventional weapon systems needed to equip the EU armed forces, twenty-three of which are simultaneously NATO allies. The EU and NATO have been supplying such conventional capabilities to Ukraine, but they cannot leave themselves defenseless by failing to replace them. Second, nuclear weapons are expensive to develop, produce and deploy, and create enormous nuclear waste—issues that are bound to be concerning to EU voters. The EU will be much better defended by concentrating on rapidly modernizing its conventional forces.
Not in my lifetime. Most importantly, it’s unlikely that Washington will soon abandon extended nuclear deterrence. A second Trump administration would likely challenge the Europeans on economic, political, and military issues. But withdrawing from NATO and rescinding nuclear commitments would lead to a collapse of the US-led global order. Geopolitical strife, macroeconomic crisis, and the withering of US influence cannot be the goals of anyone occupying the White House. Nevertheless, loose talk of throwing allies under the bus, demolishing democracy, and destroying institutions weakens US credibility. Therefore, strengthening the European pillar of conventional and nuclear deterrence within NATO makes sense.
Further reading:
EU nuclear weapons ‘unrealistic,’ says German defense committee chair, Politico, Šejla Ahmatović
France’s Nuclear Weapons and Europe, SWP, Liviu Horovitz & Lydia Wachs
Will Europe Get Its Own Bomb? Washington Quarterly, Bruno Tertrais
That’s it for The Hundred. Please share this post with friends and colleagues if you found it interesting. To support the project, subscribe.