Nuclear Deterrence: Does Germany Need the Bomb?

BIf the Chancellor’s word of power remains the last in this matter, then the nuclear era in Germany will end shortly after Easter. Not even the “turning point” bombed by Putin could change anything; in order to delay the final exit by only three months and one power plant, Scholz had to refer to his policy competence. Since then, even the FDP has been quiet, at least for now. In Berlin, not only the peaceful use of nuclear power should urgently be made an issue beyond April, but also the military one.

A German taboo that survived the attack

But that is a German taboo that survived Putin’s attack on Ukraine and Europe’s security architecture unscathed. Even the Russian president’s nuclear saber-rattling led at best to arguments about what to do Not be allowed to do in order not to drive the Kremlin into a nuclear war. In Berlin, there are fears that even the delivery of modern battle tanks could influence the course of the war to such an extent that the Kremlin would only be able to help itself with a tactical nuclear strike.

The horror would be boundless, but one thing Moscow would hardly have to fear: a nuclear retaliation. In the 1990s, Ukraine handed over the Soviet nuclear weapons stationed on its territory to Russia against the assurances, also given by Moscow, that the state sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country would be respected. In Western Europe, only France and Britain have nuclear weapons designed to deter Russia from attacking their countries. There is no mention of a nuclear-led battle in Ukraine in their doctrines.

America will not go to nuclear war because of Ukraine

The Americans would also be unlikely to respond with nuclear weapons to a Russian first action in Ukraine, which is not a member of NATO. Washington wants Kyiv not to lose the war and that Putin will continue to weaken himself with it. But because of a country that most Americans are unlikely to even know the exact location of, a US president is unlikely to engage in a nuclear exchange with Russia that, at the end of a spiral of escalation, could see both nuclear powers tangle with their thousands destroy each other’s warheads. And the rest of the world too.

Would it be different in the case of a close ally? German security policy relies entirely on being under the American nuclear umbrella. However, there were already doubts about this when American presidents did not want to let any doubts arise. But then Donald Trump appeared and undermined the credibility of so-called “extended deterrence” in a way the Kremlin had not dared hope. Trump made it very clear that he doesn’t care about Europe’s fate; it should kindly take care of its own protection.

It is far from certain that NATO – also once declared “brain dead” by a French president – ​​would have survived Trump’s stay in office. It’s pulling him back into the White House with a vengeance. Even if he doesn’t make it, it would be grossly negligent to view Trump’s presidency as just an accident in American history. Rather, it is to be feared that the “Atlanticist” Biden is now the exception in an America that believes less and less that it has to worry about the security and stability of Europe.