The difficult path of the European Union for nuclear independence from the United States in the era of Trump

According to the report of the international group Tasnim news agency, “An In an article, TV addressed the challenge of Trump’s reinstatement in America for the European Union, especially in the field of nuclear independence from the United States, and wrote: If Donald Trump, the former president of the United States, returns to the White House, the promise of nuclear protection of the United States It will no longer be of such value to Brussels. But the path of Europe becoming a nuclear power is not easy.

This article continues: Since its establishment, the European Union has guaranteed one thing more than anything else. Slow: Peace in Europe. So far, it has stuck to its economic tools to achieve this goal. In the meantime, the sovereignty over the defense policy lies with each member state that wants to maintain its independence in this matter. So it’s no surprise that the statement (made recently by a European official) that the EU’s autonomous nuclear bombs “could become a matter of getting a European army” is causing some consternation. This truly cautious prediction comes from Katharina Barelli, the main candidate of the Social Democratic Party for the European elections. A sentence from his own party.

This article continues: What this European official says is not so absurd. At least if the European Union becomes a defense union, fruitful cooperation among Europeans in the path of its nuclear deterrence is conceivable. However, there are many open questions about costs, feasibility and decision-making power.

The first issue is for EU institutions to decide whether and When a nuclear strike should be launched is rarely possible. However, if former US President Donald Trump, once re-elected, follows through on his threat to end the promise of US nuclear protection for countries that miss NATO’s two percent target, Europeans should consider How they create an alternative in their continent. According to the sound of the sword of Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, everything must be done quickly. has been nuclear, the promise of an independent nuclear safeguard for Europe can be worked on, with Paris taking the reins. French President Emmanuel Macron has already offered the German federal government several talks on the matter, most recently at the beginning of 2022, before the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Therefore, the two countries should hold a strategic dialogue about the role of France’s nuclear deterrence for common security. No response has been received from Berlin to this effect yet.

This article continues: Since Barley’s initiative, there has been a lot of serious speculation about Macron’s intentions. There has been about your proposal. Olaf Schultz, the chancellor of Germany, can find an answer to this question only if he accepts the offer of dialogue. French Foreign Minister Stephane Sejournay’s comments suggest that Macron is indeed interested in making the EU more militarily independent. In an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper, he said that Europe can use a “second life insurance policy” in addition to the extensive US nuclear deterrence within NATO.

Kehard Lubkemeier, a former European diplomat who researches EU crises for the Berlin Foundation for Science and Politics, also shares this opinion. In an interview with NTV, he says that although Europeans can enjoy America’s nuclear security guarantees, they should note that this deterrence is not rooted in the European Union itself. He added: “The main question about nuclear deterrence, which does not serve to protect those who have nuclear weapons themselves, is this: to what extent does it promise protection both to its allies and to a possible enemy and to those who should act? It is valid for them to have deterrence.

NTV further wrote: The geopolitical situation creates the possibility that sooner or later the Europeans will be forced to adopt a defense policy. Including nuclear stand-up Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, the focus of US foreign policy has shifted from European security to its defense against China, which claims to play a leadership role on the world stage. Moreover, US presidents are under domestic political pressure to answer their constituents’ questions about why wealthy Europe cannot guarantee its own security. For this reason, the United States has been encouraging its NATO allies for some time to achieve the goal of investing two percent of their GDP in defense.

Luebkemeyer believes that it is possible that Paris can make a credible promise of nuclear protection for Europe. According to him, one of the reasons for this is that, unlike America, France is a European neighbor. According to Lubkemeyer, such a project will only succeed if the European Union becomes a political union with its own defense arm, which Germany and France in particular must ensure; Not as a replacement for NATO, but within the framework of NATO, which will then rely on a European and American pillar. After Brexit, if the UK wants to, it can also enter this organization as a member of NATO.

” Luebkemeier said: But Europe’s nuclear weapons are under the control of the president. A United States of Europe cannot be expected because European countries are not ready to merge into a federal country. He added: Europe’s self-defense is still conceivable as a process goal in which EU countries continue to grow together – not into a federal government, but into a “European Defense Union with France as its nuclear backbone”.

The article continues: Europeans are still a long way from such a defense union. In the EU, several attempts to create a European force with a few thousand soldiers in addition to the national army have failed, and a look at the polls shows In the upcoming European elections in June, right-wing populist parties that have always been enemies of the Brussels technocrats are on the rise. Moreover, it cannot be ruled out that far-right Marine Le Pen, after In the upcoming elections, take the helm of France. Le Pen claims that any promise of help from Macron, even nuclear deterrence, represents a betrayal of France. If the US reneges on its nuclear safeguards promise to Europe, right-wing populist parties could also take a swing, says Berlin policy. However, he considers this scenario to be extremely unrealistic. “I’ve been under the Trump administration for the last four years. Aside from the rhetoric, there is little reason to suggest that Trump would be willing to withdraw from NATO if re-elected.” According to him, France’s proposal for negotiation was “ambiguous”. Horowitz sees the current situation as more similar to the situation where the Germans have been invited to participate in the exercises. Build inside NATO with France, although the promise of US support is still there, why would this nuclear deterrent be so much more credible than working with Washington? Geographical proximity alone does not determine deterrence validity, he says. Because France is not yet ready to give up or even share the power to decide on its nuclear arsenal. Ultimately, the Americans and the French must also come to an agreement within NATO, Horowitz adds. This is difficult: the French declared themselves a nuclear power in 1960 to become more independent from the United States.

Germany’s NTV wrote further: NATO keeps secret the exact number of nuclear weapons deployed in Europe. However, experts assume that there are 100 nuclear bombs, of which about 20 are stored at the German airbase in Bueschel. Other warheads are located at Kleine-Brogel in Belgium, Aviano and Ghedi in Italy, Volkel in the Netherlands and Incirlik in Turkey. However, NATO’s nuclear weapons based in Europe represent only a small part of the total arsenal of nuclear powers. According to the Association of American Scientists, Russia has approximately 5,900 nuclear warheads, the United States more than 5,200, the United Kingdom 225, and France 290.

Regarding nuclear arsenals France and Britain are small compared to the United States or Russia, Martin Galler, a member of the Christian Democratic Party of Germany and spokesperson for the People’s Party’s security policy in the European Parliament, also sees problems in the path of an independent European nuclear deterrent. “It will not only require enormous efforts, especially financial, to compensate for the loss of the US nuclear shield, but it will also be a very long-term commitment,” Galler told NTV. Therefore, this approach is not suitable for responding to the acute threat situation in the short term. For Galler, it also raises the question of how a European nuclear umbrella backed by France and the UK should be designed in terms of deciding on a worst-case scenario. Galler emphasizes: “However, clear decision-making structures that allow for rapid response are a prerequisite for nuclear deterrence.” : Trump has literally forced the debate on nuclear security on the Europeans, but in Galler’s view they should not lose themselves. Finally, Trump’s threats should be seen as a warning. Martin Galler said: “Unfortunately, we cannot close our eyes to the possibility that in the future we may have to organize our European security and defense independently.

end of message/