Alain Rouy, Le Mouvement de la Paix, France
In France, Le Mouvement de la Paix has always campaigned against French nuclear armaments, and we are fighting for nuclear disarmament and the signature of the TPNW. The question of a European nuclear bomb has never really been raised by French politicians. It has only recently come up in connection with the discussion of the need for a credible European defence in the case of the USA turning its back on the defence of Europe.
It was in this context that President Macron, who wants France to play a major role in European defence, raised the question of the role of French atomic weapons in European defence in 2020 and in 2024. President Emmanuel Macron said he was willing to discuss using French nuclear warheads as part of a “credible European defence” against threats from Russia.
“I am in favour of opening this debate, which has to include missile defence, long-range weapons firing, nuclear weapons for those who have it, or who have American nuclear weapons on their soil,” Macron said in an interview with regional newspapers on April 2024.
The problem is: Mr Macron likes to be disruptive. He openly called for debate in Europe over using the nuclear capabilities of France to defend the continent. He wants to force the European Union to decide whether it needs a nuclear deterrent of its own—and suggests France may help with this. But it is not a clear proposal: is France willing—and capable—of extending its nuclear umbrella to the rest of the Union? For this to happen, France would need to address multiple issues, starting with the crucial question of full decision-making over its arsenal. Who decides? It’s against the French doctrine of nuclear deterrence.
Another question is the impact such a decision would have on NATO and its relations with the United States and its fellow EU member states. There is in France absolutely no open debate, no public debate on our relations to NATO. For the public, Macron criticizes NATO, sometimes in very negative terms («brain death»). But in reality, France is aligning itself as never before with US and NATO policy, as we saw two weeks ago in Washington at the NATO summit. France is one of the warmongers, actively contributing to the militarization of international relations.
On the other hand France has historically seen itself as an independent force counterbalancing that of the United States in Europe. This spirit persists today: France still does not participate in NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group. In practice, the idea of a French nuclear umbrella for Europe doest not convince a lot of EU countries, especially in eastern Europe which would most certainly prefer the stability offered by continuing to rely on the US nuclear deterrent.
In our opinion, Macron’s vision for European security is a political posture; to become a realistic plan, President Macron must first tell his European partners to what extent he is willing to share France’s nuclear deterrent. At the moment, discussion of the Eurobomb has no chance of leading to anything concrete, as there is no realistic short- or medium-term plan, but it plays a major role in the ideological battle and the battle of opinion; it is part of the atmosphere of war and militarization of society, and prevents the development of alternatives. Nobody talks about arms control negotiations any more, and we all know the difficulties pacifists have in promoting the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty.
It’s a big challenge for us, but we also have reason to be hopeful when we see that the Global South is rejecting these European themes. The big question is human security, and this is where we and civil society will be present at the UN Summit for the Future in New York in September. Human security!