Initially pushed by Eastern European members, particularly Poland, as another way to challenge Russia, the European Union is now seen warming to the idea of establishing its own alliance-wide nuclear weapons program placed under common European command.
This plan appears to fall well short of Poland’s call for a Russia-sized nuclear arsenal, and would start with France, the one EU member nation with an existing nuclear arsenal, handing over its arsenal to the union to be placed under the union’s command.
Those in favor of the scheme initially envisioned merging the British and French arsenals, though with Britain withdrawing from the EU, France is essentially all that’s left. From France’s perspective, this may be a good way to get the rest of the alliance to pay for their costly arsenal’s upkeep.
The plan is being sold as a response to the risk of President Trump dialing back support for the EU, though it doesn’t appear that the arsenal will actually be growing with this move, but rather be shifting to a different command.
It saddends me that Poland is caught in the grip of these maniacs!
This is not due to any one party in Poland. My wife is from Poland originally, and back during the Clinton administration we were bombarded with admonitions from Polish-American organizations to call and write our elected representatives to push for NATO expansion. Speaking to her relatives back in the old country, the reason was quite clear – it was in the hope that they could end universal military service once under NATO’s protection. They did that but now in addition to the military they are now setting up local paramilitary “militias”, and are talking about bringing back universal service after all. This is all on top of the fact that they now host foreign military on their soil, and in the event of a nuclear exchange it would be most likely limited to military theaters of operation (i.e. Poland).
This is how organizations like NATO and the EU suck in nations into their orbit. The promise something for nothing – whether it be NATO protection or job opportunities for the young in the EU zone. When they have lost their sovereignty and the ability to have their own economic or foreign policies it is too late.
“…placed under common European command.”
Presumably this would also include prepositioning these weapons in theater…under the nominal control of the host nation. This would be a very, very bad idea – especially in this age where the leaders of many countries are far to the right of the majority of the people. One can only imagine the possibilities, if, say Ukraine with their current leadreship corps were a NATO member…with nukes placed under their care.
This would be seen as the US’s plans for nuclear arms proliferation if it wasn’t that it’s already happened in several countries in Europe. About the only difference is that those countries will now be able to call the nuclear weapons their own.
Will this be opening the door to Russia to arm some of it’s few remaing proxies? Iran?
Maybe Iran is not all that serious about no nukes on it’s soil, in the interest of a larger need? Survival!
Already the USA has placed nukes in Germany, the Netherlands, Turkey (!) even though the populations were never asked and many do not want them. Nukes are treated as if they are not really likely to be used despite the grave dangers which “our leaders” seem to ignore.
So true rose; it’s the new style of nuclear proliferation. Arm up all your client states. And the US arrogance seems to be pulling it off, at least in the short term.
When things get heated up a little more then it’s just bound to result in Russia and China doing the same with their clients.
Brings back recollections of the Cuba misslie crisis! Could we imagine another one similar but with China arming up a S. American proxy state? It looks like there are lots of willing customers who would be happy to have immunity from nuclear war.