SHARE
What began as an idea floated by French President Emmanuel Macron about extending France’s nuclear weapons for broader European use, has quickly escalated into a full-blown debate about nuclear proliferation as leaders scramble to respond to uncertainties raised by Trump’s many changes in foreign policy.
Across Europe and Asia, political leaders are openly discussing new nuclear armament, with some even suggesting stationing nuclear weapons on their soil. These suggestions are being put forward in open defiance of their country’s international legal commitments to the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty.
Expanding French nuclear weapons across Europe
On 5 March, in an address to the French nation about increasing nuclear spending, French President Macron said he had “decided to open the strategic debate on the protection of our allies on the European continent through our (nuclear) deterrence”. France is currently one of three nuclear armed members of the NATO alliance, though it has never participated in NATO’s nuclear planning group, unlike the US and UK both of which have committed their arsenals towards alliance defence.
German incitement to nuclear proliferation
Macron’s offer has been seen as a response to German Chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz’s call for an expansion of French and British nuclear cooperation with others in Europe. In what can only be described as a panic reaction to anticipated changes in US foreign policy, such rhetoric deviates from the established policy of considering such a policy as unpopular, unfeasible and impractical. While Merz has not suggested that Germany build its own nuclear arsenal, his remarks encourage the proliferation of nuclear weapons across Europe, while his country already hosts approximately 20 U.S. nuclear bombs, and trains its pilots in their delivery.
This nuclear sharing practice has been repeatedly condemned by other countries as undermining the letter and spirit nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, including by a group of 120 countries who expressed deep concern at “the continued and evolving nuclear weapons sharing arrangements and extended deterrence.”
Merz has not elaborated on what this nuclear cooperation could look like. The UK currently fields nuclear armed submarines only, whereas the French also deploy air-launched cruise missiles. Any shift in stationing of nuclear capable French fighter jets (Rafale) would not be possible until at least 2035 or 2040.
Belgium, Poland, Finland encourage more nuclear weapons in Europe
Belgian Prime Minister Bart de Wever added his voice to those calling for more nuclear weapons in Europe, suggesting the need for a pan-European “nuclear umbrella“, citing concern for eastern European states as a justification.
Polish President Andrzej Duda, in an interview with the Financial Times, called on Washington to deploy nuclear weapons in Poland.
In Finland, both the Prime Minister and the Chair of the Defence Committee of the Finnish Parliament have welcomed the possibility of an expanded role for French nuclear weapons in Europe.
Lithuania national legislation prohibits nuclear weapons deployment
Lithuanian Defense Minister Dovile Sakaliene said "We believe we need to look into the possibility of adjusting Article 137 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania if our allies propose realistic plans for the deployment of nuclear weapons or their components in Lithuania, and also to review other commitments," during a press conference at the Military Academy.
Currently, the Lithuanian constitution prohibits the deployment of any weapons of mass destruction or foreign military bases on Lithuanian soil.
Impacts on populations and economies
What none of these leaders have explained, or raised in their commentary is what an increased number or broader deployment of nuclear weapons across the European continent would mean for European safety. The risks of nuclear weapons use has not been factored into these calculations - nor what the impacts of even an accidental detonation would mean to surrounding populations.
Even if Europe pursued nuclear armament, it would take years of political will, massive financial investment, and technological development.
Nuclear weapons in Europe are meant to be used in Europe. Discussions about expanding nuclear deterrence often ignore the most obvious fact: these weapons are designed to be deployed and detonated on European soil. Leaders entertaining the idea of hosting nuclear weapons are, in effect, contemplating turning their own countries into nuclear targets. This is not about abstract deterrence—it is about real risks to millions of civilians.
Condemnations of this proliferation rhetoric
Rather than fueling reckless discussions about nuclear proliferation, leaders must reject this dangerous path. The expansion of nuclear weapons capabilities is not a route to safety—it is a direct road to disaster. The only viable security strategy is one that upholds international law, prioritizes disarmament, and moves the world away from the brink of nuclear catastrophe.
ICAN Resources
ICAN has prepared more materials on the issue of calling out nuclear deterrence here:
Let's Be Realists - answers to common comments and questions about nuclear weapons
Five myths of nuclear deterrence
Surge: 2023 Global nuclear weapons spending
Talking points on European proliferation
In addition, you can find the statement of ICAN partners at the recent third Meeting of States Parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), here.