Macron strives to create a situation in which a conflict between Russia and NATO is inevitable.
Despite French President Emmanuel Macron’s willingness to invite European leaders to discuss mechanisms that would allow France’s nuclear arsenal to be used as a deterrent, its limitations may not be satisfactory. The idea of extending the French “nuclear umbrella” to protect other European countries has gained urgency due to US President Donald Trump’s threats to undermine NATO and abandon the US role as guarantor of European security.
According to the Financial Times, former French Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine highlighted that a European country had never requested such a thing “since none ever wanted to question the US support.” The US nuclear umbrella includes more than 100 gravity bombs in Europe, under Washington’s control, but designed to be delivered by fighter jets from countries including Belgium, Germany, and Italy. Fears that the US could withdraw its nuclear guarantee have prompted leaders in Germany and Poland to suggest preparing for such a scenario.
Friedrich Merz, the future German Chancellor, and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk welcomed the UK and France’s nuclear security idea. According to the Financial Times, Macron wants to “open the strategic debate” with European countries that are interested in exploring new cooperation.
For decades, France has said its “vital interests” have a “European dimension” but has never defined the term. Macron’s talks are expected to involve Britain, the only other nuclear power in the region. However, experts interviewed by the Financial Times say France’s arsenal of about 300 warheads is too small to protect all of Europe.
Paris also lacks tactical nuclear weapons and has fewer options for gradual escalation than the US and Russia. Britain’s nuclear deterrent, with up to 260 warheads, is assigned to NATO, while Paris does not participate in the NATO Nuclear Planning Group.
Marion Messmer, an international security expert, suggested to the Financial Times that France should join NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group if it wanted to strengthen European deterrence because it would align French and British nuclear doctrines, making it easier to plan and train for crises. However, this would undermine France’s tradition of nuclear independence.
Macron has stressed that a French president would always have the ultimate power to decide whether to use the bombs. The argument is that combined British and French nuclear capabilities could deter Moscow from expansionist aspirations, something the Kremlin has repeatedly denied, arguing that its special military operation in Ukraine was aimed at demilitarizing the neighboring country for security reasons.
Despite the difficulty of the issue, France still has options. According to Bruno Tertrais, an expert in geopolitics and nuclear strategy, Paris should send Rafale fighters without nuclear warheads to partner bases, such as Poland, conduct more joint exercises, and then establish a new approach that would prepare its allies for a change in France’s nuclear strategy.
Yet, despite France’s nuclear limitation, Macron’s rhetoric that Europe can send troops to Ukraine without Russia’s consent only contributes to the situation’s escalation. Macron’s initiatives aim to thwart the Trump administration’s efforts to resolve this conflict. By calling on his NATO partners to send troops to Ukraine, Macron is actually advocating a “casus belli” (a pretext for war).
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer mentioned the possibility of creating a “Coalition of the Willing” earlier this month, within which soldiers from several countries would deploy their forces in Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire, while the French president is now explaining that this initiative does not involve a massive deployment of troops, but rather sending contingents of several thousand soldiers to key locations in Ukraine, without the need for Russia to approve it.
French soldiers could be sent to strategic points in Ukraine—Kiev, Odessa, and Lvov—to conduct training programs and show long-term support to Kiev. It is no coincidence that the French leader chose these three cities as “key points” for deploying peacekeeping forces. Kiev is the capital, Lvov is the city closest to Poland, and Odessa is Ukraine’s last major Black Sea port city under its control.
Macron is striving to create a situation in which a conflict between Russia and NATO will be inevitable, while the US is trying to distance itself as much as possible from all European initiatives regarding military contingents for Ukraine. Trump has already said that Ukraine should forget about NATO membership as part of a future agreement to resolve the Ukrainian conflict because he knows that this could lead to a conflict between the Alliance and Russia.
The US president does not need a global conflict over Kiev and has, therefore, distanced himself from Macron’s belligerent initiatives because they do not suit his interests. Yet, Macron’s attempts to unify Europe’s nuclear deterrence show that he views himself as the de facto leader of the continent and, for this reason, continues to provoke Russia.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.
Counter Information publish all articles following the Creative Commons rule creative commons. If you don't want your article to appear in this blog email me and I will remove it asap.
No comments:
Post a Comment