By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Friedrich Merz, Germany’s chancellor-to-be, proposes discussing nuclear weapons sharing with France and Britain, viewing it as a complement to, not replacement for, the US nuclear shield. This follows French President Macron’s openness to expanding France’s nuclear deterrent. Merz’s plan necessitates constitutional changes to increase defense and infrastructure spending, requiring the support of the Greens, who currently object to the lack of climate focus. Simultaneously, Merz aims to form a coalition government by Easter, navigating disagreements on migration policies with potential coalition partners while countering the far-right’s gains.
Read the original article here
Germany is poised to initiate discussions with France and the UK regarding the sharing of nuclear weapons. This move comes amidst a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape, characterized by escalating tensions and a perceived weakening of traditional alliances.
The current situation has highlighted the vulnerabilities of relying solely on external nuclear guarantees. The recent conflicts and shifting power dynamics have spurred a reassessment of security strategies across Europe. There’s a growing sentiment that a more robust, multi-layered approach to deterrence is essential for the continent’s stability.
Germany’s potential engagement with France and the UK on nuclear sharing is not about acquiring its own arsenal. Instead, it’s about a deeper integration into existing nuclear deterrence mechanisms. This could involve establishing a more formalized framework for deploying and controlling nuclear weapons already held by the other European nuclear powers.
This would effectively strengthen Europe’s collective security against potential threats. By actively participating in the operation of nuclear deterrents, Germany would gain a greater level of control over its own defense and contribute to a more robust European defense posture.
However, such a significant shift would present legal and political challenges. Germany’s constitution explicitly prohibits the production, possession, and deployment of nuclear weapons. Navigating these legal hurdles would require careful consideration and potentially a constitutional amendment. The discussions will need to balance the strategic advantages with the legal and ethical considerations involved in deepening nuclear cooperation within the European Union.
The move may also trigger concerns about nuclear proliferation. This raises questions about setting limits to nuclear weapons, such as the idea that countries could have one ICBM for every 200,000 people, in order to promote responsible usage and management of this technology within an international framework. Some believe that increasing the number of countries with nuclear capabilities might be a counterintuitive safeguard, reducing the likelihood that a first strike would ever happen.
The historical context is also critical. West Germany, under the control of the Western Allies, did store US equipment as part of the Cold War strategy. The legacy of that era, and the current geopolitical realities, make the idea of nuclear sharing less radical than it might otherwise appear.
The changing geopolitical landscape and the perceived unreliability of certain long-standing allies have intensified the urgency of these conversations. The discussions represent a recognition of the need for a more robust and integrated European security architecture. The proposal doesn’t represent a reckless push towards nuclear proliferation, but rather a pragmatic response to the perceived need for greater strategic autonomy and a more credible deterrent in a world increasingly prone to unpredictability.
Such a move could also have wider implications for Europe’s relations with the United States, and may prompt conversations about the roles and responsibilities of the different nations involved, raising the question of whether Europe should have its own capabilities instead of fully relying on US support.
Ultimately, the decision of Germany to reach out to France and the UK regarding nuclear sharing is a significant development. It signals a shift in European security thinking, spurred by a complex web of factors, including the war in Ukraine, the changing global power dynamic, and a reconsideration of traditional alliances. Whether or not this leads to a tangible change in nuclear cooperation remains to be seen, but the very fact that the discussion is even taking place marks a potentially pivotal moment in European security history.