The head of state provoked strong reactions by declaring that France, which has nuclear weapons, could contribute more to the protection of Europe.
Does Emmanuel Macron want to extend the French nuclear umbrella to our neighbors? In an interview published on April 27 by the newspapers of the Ebra press group, the President of the Republic declared his desire to go “further away” in the integration of European defense. Even if it means mentioning “nuclear weapon”whether American (via NATO) or French. “I am in favor of opening this debate”assumes the head of state, particularly in the face of a Russian regime that he considers increasingly threatening.
From the left to the far right, criticism of the opposition was not long in coming. While France is, with the United Kingdom, the only country in the European area to possess its own nuclear weapon, Emmanuel Macron is accused of wanting to share this almost unique advantage on the continent. Worse, to want “liquidate” this military and diplomatic asset. But is this really what he suggests? Franceinfo returns to the declarations of the Head of State and the arguments of his detractors.
What does Emmanuel Macron propose?
In his response to young Europeans who questioned him about nuclear defense, Emmanuel Macron first cited NATO as “form of protection”. In the name of the North Atlantic Treaty, which links the United States and Canada to 30 other states in the European area, any nuclear attack against one of the member countries would indeed result in a proportionate response. – and therefore nuclear. This deterrence is even presented by NATO as the “supreme guarantee of the security of the alliance”. This aims to prevent member countries such as Italy, Spain and Poland from being targeted by nuclear strikes.
But the French president wants other guarantees. “He we must now go further, build a credible European defense”he urges in the interview published by the Ebra group. Concretely, Emmanuel Macron therefore proposes to review the options available to European countries: relying on NATO, developing a “anti-missile shield”build “long-range missiles that would deter the Russians”…And determine what role French nuclear weapons could play in the midst of all this.
“The French doctrine is that we can use it when our vital interests are threatened”, explains the head of state. But these interests also include “a European dimension”, he believes, without giving other details in order to preserve the “credibility of European defense”. While keeping its “specificity” nuclear, France is however “ready to contribute further to the protection of European soil”he summarizes in this interview.
How does the political class react?
Emmanuel Macron’s proposal provoked an outcry among his opponents. Apart from the head of the environmentalist list in the European elections, Marie Toussaint, who defended “the sharing” of nuclear weapons on France 3, or the boss of MoDem, François Bayrou, who conceives that“a threat to Europe is a threat to France”many Political figures have stepped up to the plate regarding this project.
“Emmanuel Macron wishes to share our nuclear deterrent with the European Union”assured far-right MP Marine Le Pen, president of the National Rally group in the Assembly, on the social network. On the Republican side, MEP François-Xavier Bellamy believes that“a president shouldn’t say that”. “We are touching the very nerve of French sovereignty”, did he declare on Europe 1.
Sur Public Senate, the deputy Manuel Bompard, coordinator of La France insoumise, for his part denounced a project “irresponsible”. “VTwenty-seven states cannot decide collectively on the use of nuclear fire.he judged. “Macron wants to liquidate French strategic autonomy”added his colleague Bastien Lachaud, deputy for Yvelines, on.
:quality(50)/2020/03/26/phpSXuvLL.jpg)
For Héloïse Fayet, researcher at the French Institute of International Relations (Ifri), these criticisms are generally unfounded. “Emmanuel Macron has never called for a sharing of our nuclear weapons, underlines this specialist in nuclear deterrence. There ‘European dimension’ that he mentions has existed since the creation of the French nuclear deterrent, references to it can be found in the White Paper [sur la défense] from 1972 for example.” According to her, the French president is instead embarking on an exercise “of concretization, of clarification” with European partners.
“With European construction, the overlapping of vital interests is so strong that we cannot imagine that Poland, for example, would be affected without France being affected at the same time or shortly after.”
Héloïse Fayet, specialist in nuclear deterrenceat franceinfo
After a first statement on this subject during a visit to Sweden at the end of January, the head of state is not just repeating the French nuclear doctrine, believes journalist Jean-Dominique Merchet, a specialist in military issues. “In small steps, Emmanuel Macron is moving our defense policy”he writes in Opinionevoking a “very cautious evolution”.
Still, the Macron method annoys. “The ‘credible’ European defense that the Head of State constantly calls for will never see the light of day if he persists in launching trial balloons in the press, instead of discussing them in a framework serious with our allies”judged Senator Cédric Perrin, member of the Republicans and chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, on Public Senate.
Why bring up this topic now?
In the eyes of the French president, a clarification is necessary in the face of “uninhibited regional powers”, like Iran, but especially Russia, singled out during his speech on Europe at the Sorbonne on April 25. Engaged for more than two years in the war in Ukraine, the Russian regime worries and justifies the continuation of “strategic ambiguity”according to the French president.
“It is very important to remain ambiguous when we talk about nuclear deterrence, underlines Héloïse Fayet. We notice that when Emmanuel Macron mentions the ‘European dimension’ of vital interests, he remains vague, he does not speak of the European Union for example.” In other words, by drawing a sufficiently vague red line, a nuclear power is better able to exercise its deterrence capacity – and to extend it to other countries.
:quality(50)/2023/09/07/043-dpa-pa-221125-99-660405-dpai-64fa25eacd291706168680.jpg)
At the same time, other European countries are offering means of defense against the threats weighing on the continent. Led by Germany, a coalition of around twenty states is developing the Sky Shield anti-missile shield. But France is currently keeping a safe distance from this project, considered too dependent on American and Israeli technologies.
Above all, NATO’s nuclear umbrella could close in Europe if Donald Trump is elected president in the United States. “He there is great uncertainty about the nature of the American commitment within NATO after November 5“, explains Héloïse Fayet. In the past, Donald Trump has indeed increased his attacks against the alliance, and even suggested that it might not protect an ally in the event of a Russian attack.
In summary, the context is sufficiently tense for the executive to question again the contours of French nuclear deterrence. And the discussions could gain momentum. “If France wants to join the NATO nuclear planning group or develop its doctrine, it would be extremely healthy and necessary for a debate to take place within the national Parliament”, recommends Héloïse Fayet. It remains to be seen whether this hot topic will land in the hemicycles.