r/europe • u/B1TR4PY401FURSH0T4DS • 2d ago
News Paris and Berlin to discuss French nukes’ role in Europe
https://www.politico.eu/article/france-germany-open-strategic-dialogue-nuclear-weapons-emmanuel-macron-friedrich-merz/12
u/Arvi89 Île-de-France 2d ago
Maybe when Germany will start to buy from EU we can discuss.
30
u/Stabile_Feldmaus Germany 2d ago
"Buying from EU" is French for "Buying from France". Anyway I hope that Merz and France have cooler heads than people on Reddit (me included)
45
u/lulzcam7 France 2d ago edited 2d ago
We are deeply sorry we maintened an industrial basis for being able to produce almost every aspects of a modern army.
9
u/Arvi89 Île-de-France 2d ago
Well, maybe if you want French nukes you should buy French fighters jets yes, that's not too crazy. But that's not what I'm talking about. I mean, stop buying F35 and making a deal with Russia for gas in exchange of closing nuclear plants was maybe not the best idea.
0
u/VigorousElk 2d ago
Everyone and their grandma in Europe are buying the F-35 - UK, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Poland, Finland, Belgium, Greece, Czechia, Germany ...
Maybe if France wanted countries to buy French jets they should offer a better product. You can't expect countries to choose a 4th generation Rafale over a 5th generation F-35.
2
u/Arvi89 Île-de-France 2d ago
They don't ask for French nukes. And the rafale is a perfectly fine fighter jet, India wouldn't buy 100 otherwise.
0
u/VigorousElk 2d ago
No one is 'asking for French nukes'. There are high level discussions on how to extent France's nuclear umbrella to the rest of the EU, that can come in many forms and can include financial contributions by other countries to France's nuclear program. In no way has anyone asked to physically receive French nukes and strap them to their own planes yet, so there is no reason to force anyone to buy Rafales to carry them.
0
u/Arvi89 Île-de-France 2d ago
Well it has been discussed actually at some point, the ability to carry them by allies.
But even if it's just about the umbrella, not only rafale is a good plane (it just "won" against F35 in dogfight, you don't necessarily need the stealth capability, especially for defense.
-1
u/mrtn17 Nederland 2d ago
It was not about superiority when the jets were bought. The purchase of F-35 happened before Trump, in a time where people relied heavily on their traditional American alliance. Buying expensive jets from them reassured that alliance. It was the same thing with the predecessor F-16. But that all changed, Trump is a high risk.
3
u/Kalagorinor 2d ago
Germany has long benefited from being the top EU exporter, both outside and inside the union. It's reasonable (and fair) for France to ask for the privilege of selling weapons when that's one of their areas of expertise. In any case, better to buy European than American.
-4
u/Affectionate_Ad5646 2d ago
You should get your head out of your arse, honestly. Yes, France was right about the US turning away from Europe, or to be precise: Macron and the defense establishment in Paris were right about it. But France alone does not have the means nor the production capacities to protect Europe. And it’s not unlikely that your political system is about to become even more unstable. So we need to work together.
3
u/Bitoncule France 2d ago
We need to work together = let's depend more on the usa because it's the way we've always done things and it got us as rich as we are now. That's the german motto
0
u/Arvi89 Île-de-France 2d ago
Again, when Germany will be a team player, then they can be part of the discussion.
-1
u/Affectionate_Ad5646 2d ago
That’s a bit rich coming from the country that is regularly upset when it cannot have the majority stake in defense cooperation. Or doesn’t share its nuclear capabilities with the rest of NATO, like the UK. Or didn’t deliver shit to defend Ukraine. Or ignores other Europeans while propping up African dictators.
3
u/Arvi89 Île-de-France 2d ago
Oh, some German propaganda.
First, dassault is not France. Seconde, of course dassault wants to decide how to build fighter jets, because they know how to do it, Airbus doesn't. But they want to acquire all the IP. And they are fine being the ones making decisions for the drone parts. Oh, because they just want to control everything and steal all the IP.
And it's hilarious you think France should share nuclear capabilities, when Germany buys F35 so it's literally impossible. Also Germany has proved over the last century they are not trust worthy. France actually should not have joined NATO again under Sarkozy that was a mistake.
As for Ukraine, should we do more? Yes. But we definitely participate.
Finally, your last sentence is just invention again, but it's expected from people pushing business and ties with Russia. Germany was so proud closing nuclear plants just so they could buy more Russian gas.
0
1
u/VigorousElk 2d ago
Germany is a team player with practically almost every other European country. It has military cooperations with dozens of other countries - submarines with Norway, tanks with Italy, the Meteor missile (best air to air missile in the world) with the UK, France, Spain and Sweden, integrating its army with the Netherland's, the Boxer development and production with the UK and the Netherlands, ELSA with the UK ...
It's funny how French Redditors are always trying to paint Germany as an egotistical lone wolf who no one in Europe wants to collaborate with, when the opposite is true.
3
u/Arvi89 Île-de-France 2d ago
Germany likes cooperation when they can take control. Also if there is ont things they don't want it's France to succeed somewhere. Dassault has no problem working with Airbus on the defense program, they actually don't get any say on the drone part. But Airbus doesn't have the knowledge for fighters jets that Dassault has, yet they want to have equal leadership...
3
u/Professional_Fix4056 Europe 2d ago
Any written deal in today's world clearly isn't worth the paper it's written on.
Get your own nukes or get invaded, it's that simple
7
u/Stabile_Feldmaus Germany 2d ago
Germany, Poland and some like-minded countries should start their own nuke project. This is imo much more important than FCAS. When we reach a level where we have equal capabilities as France we can talk about merging them into one EU nuclear umbrella.
8
u/Giraffed7 2d ago
Germany, Poland and some like-minded countries should start their own nuke project. This is imo much more important than FCAS. When we reach a level where we have equal capabilities as France we can talk about merging them into one EU nuclear umbrella.
It won’t be done, and rightly so, for many reasons : i) other nuclear countries won’t let it be done easily as having an oligopoly on the nuke is beneficial for them, ii) non nuclear countries won’t let it be done easily as having more and more nuclear countries decreases global security and lead to an arms race beneficial to none, iii) it is really hard and expensive to bring your nuke capabilities to the level required to have a real deterrence : you need several dozens of thermonuclear nukes (not the "basic" design of Hiroshima), the enrichment capability to back it up, the maintenance footprint, the logistics and bases equipped to handle the nukes, and then you have to pay and develop the hardest thing of them all, your vectors : the ICBM and the thing that carry it (nuclear submarines, the attack submarines that protect them or planes that carry the bomb and aerial refuelling planes to give them more reach and so on and so forth).
You have to pay to develop (as other nuclear countries won’t share their secrets because it is illegal and wouldn’t be beneficial for them as previously mentioned), field and maintain all of that, or nearly all of that.
All this money could better be spent elsewhere, and a fraction of the money Germany, Poland and some like-minded countries currently spend on buying their security (with all the uncertainty that we have on that security now) from the US could be used to help the UK and France (which would be much more inclined to protect Europe and which have already made all these aforementioned investments) maintain this deterrence and projecting it all over Europe.
-1
u/Tricky-Astronaut 2d ago
South Korea and Japan would probably welcome it as it would allow themselves to go nuclear. The existing nuclear powers wouldn't be happy, but there's only so much they can do.
Nuclear weapons aren't that expensive. If Israel can get a full traid, then so can Germany. Buying protection from Trump/Bardella/Farage certainly won't be cheaper.
6
u/No_Newspaper_1984 2d ago
EU countries should pull out of NPT so there's little chance of sanctions. US wouldn't be capable of sanctioning all EU.
1
1
u/Final-Course2506 2d ago
(If nothing will happen) We will have a Nuclear Reactor, in Poland. But only for energy, i don't think anybody would like to have our own nukes... (Don't look at Nawrocki, he doesn't count)
-1
u/northck 2d ago
US will never allow this.
0
u/dotBombAU Australia 2d ago
The US has already started the countdown on this happening already.
As Europe builds its armies, it's going to start asserting its own opinions on security and foreign policy. It is, therefore, likely that the opinion of the US will become less important as time goes on in European matters.
This an absolute certainty.
-1
u/Ho_Lee_Phuk Germany 2d ago
I don't see how this could work out. At least not between poland and germany
1
u/international_swiss 2d ago
It wouldn’t be easy because that would made US redundant. So expect sanctions and hypocrisy
2
u/Affectionate_Ad5646 2d ago
Germany should arrange to participate in France’s nuclear protection somehow, or better, work towards the extension to all of the EU, and pay the French
22
u/Ho_Lee_Phuk Germany 2d ago
Why do you feel it is germanys responsibility to work towards an extension of nuclear protection to all of the EU, let alone to pay for it? Obviously, if we want to be protected by the frensh nukes we will have to carry some of the costs, but this goes for everybody else as well.
6
u/Migs93 Portugal 2d ago
Aren’t Germany already de facto protected by France/US nukes by being a part of EU/NATO?
1
u/lulzcam7 France 2d ago
Germany (and other countries in the sharing program) can't use them like they want. Their usage is under NATO orders (and US president greenlight of course) who has plans saying where and when to use them.
For the french ones, we are entirely independant : that means we are not in the NATO nuclear plans. It's a card in our game we can choose to play or not, and nobody can tell us what to do (by giving orders, we are polite people and open to diplomatic talks).
The trigger of our nuclear fire is the defense of France's vital interests, and since Sarkozy who was the first to say it if I'm not mistaken, those interests can have an European dimension. What the fuck does that mean ? No idea, only Macron knows the answer.
9
u/NewOil7911 France 2d ago
Yes that's very weird to say that Germany should pay the French as if it was a racket protection or something.
I don't want my country to become Trumpland bandits in miniature.
-4
u/Affectionate_Ad5646 2d ago
France doesn’t protect any other country but itself. That’s their nuclear doctrine. The only reliable partner currently protecting Germany is the UK. So, we either work out a deal with France or soon might be dependent on Nigel Farage…
-11
u/Affectionate_Ad5646 2d ago
The reason is that we have the fiscal space to do so, simple as that. This is not about responsibilities, as if we shared a household, but power politics, and Germany must become the primary guarantor of European security - no one else has the means to do so. We don’t need to pay for everything, but we need to move first and be bold.
14
u/Ho_Lee_Phuk Germany 2d ago
It is up to the french to decide with whom they want to share their nukes with whom not and quite frankly I feel it would be good for the eu if the french had more influence they proved to be right about quite a few things especially regarding the security of europe
1
u/Tricky-Astronaut 2d ago
If Germany wants to be "the primary guarantor of European security", it has to get its own nukes. You can't pay yourself out.
2
u/Affectionate_Ad5646 2d ago
Longterm, yes, short term that’s impossible. Strategically, we need to protect EU states bordering Russia asap
1
u/Tricky-Astronaut 2d ago
Germany is a threshold state. Bardella is two years away. Farage is four years away. The clock is ticking.
3
u/coprosperityglobal 2d ago
Produce and istribute nukes to all EU states... So no more threats by no-one
3
u/FridgeParade 2d ago
I really hope that there’s already something secret under way thats like this, EU nukes would be the ultimate guarantee neither the US nor Russia ever even thinks about invading us.
0
u/sarges_12gauge 2d ago
I hope they withdraw from the nuclear proliferation treaties and stop sanctioning other countries then (or maybe the rest of the world would sanction Europe)
1
u/coprosperityglobal 2d ago
Actually EU has no nukes except France. Instead many other Counties have. The nukes in EU are under US control. So practically we are under Russian nuke threat
0
u/Tricky-Astronaut 2d ago
One doesn't exclude the other. Germany could get nukes and still try to prevent Iran from doing the same.
5
u/9k111Killer 2d ago
As long as we Germans don't have nukes we won't be safe and at the mercy of other people who already have shown to look after themselves first in most cases
1
u/cool-sheep 2d ago
Yeah, in the face of Russia I think it is best that Poland and Germany develop nuclear bombs. A credible deterrent of roughly 200 bombs should be enough.
The current state of politics in the US and France (and possibly the UK) doesn’t really allow for long term planning to count on them. I think buying jets is a relatively safe thing, however nukes (30+yr planning horizon) need to be domestic.
Russians respect military power.
1
u/9k111Killer 2d ago
200 isn't enough we need a 1000 ICBM to make sure that no other bigger nation can think they can come out of any sort of conflict alive
1
u/cool-sheep 2d ago
Thanks a lot for that input. Related to Curtis LeMay?
Basically the vast majority of Russia’s elite lives in 5 or 6 cities. If you have a straight and credible policy to take these out in case of attack you have an effective deterrent.
Putin manages to run his war without any problems because he keeps it far away from his people. If his plan is to destroy earth and live 1.000m underground with 10 acolytes even 10.000 nukes won’t stop him.
1
-1
0
u/WiseBelt8935 England 2d ago
that's a pretty small range. Luxembourg is sorted but what about everyone else
-6
71
u/safesouthstanding 2d ago
It is not unlikely that four years from now the Western leaders controlling Nukes will be Vance, Bardella and Farage.
The rest of us really need a plan for if/when that happens.