Europe's nuclear future: New strategies against Russia's threat!

Europe's nuclear future: New strategies against Russia's threat!

Europe's security policy landscape is currently being shaped by two extrovert shocks. First, Russia's major attack on Ukraine in 2022 has drastically changed Europeans' threat perception. NATO was able to protect its members through a credible nuclear deterrent while preventing a military escalation scenario. This shows once again that nuclear weapons also offer protection for Russia, as Western states have ruled out direct military involvement in Ukraine. As Internationalepolitik reports, the second shock came in 2025 with the Trump administration, which viewed Europe less as a partner and increasingly as a strategic disruptor. Vice President JD Vance even described the Europeans as ideological opponents.

President Trump also called on Ukraine to end the conflict on Moscow's terms. These changes in U.S. foreign policy have raised many questions about the future of nuclear deterrence in Europe. In recent years it has also become clear that the US needs to focus more on Asia while also dealing with Russia and China as equal nuclear challengers. This reality impacts Europe's strategic thinking.

The review of deterrence

After the end of the East-West conflict, the nuclear arsenals in the USA and Russia have shrunk significantly, but the stock of nuclear warheads remains significant. As a reminder: A possible nuclear conflict could have catastrophic consequences, as [bpb](https://www.bpb.de/themen/militaer/deutsche- defensespolitik/508040/nuclear-abschreitung/) highlights. Climate models also support fears of a “nuclear winter” that could be triggered by such an exchange of blows.

The European discussion about its own nuclear deterrent has returned to the surface. Politicians from Germany, Poland and the Baltic states are calling for consideration of alternatives to the current US protection. Europe faces the challenge of securing nuclear deterrence itself while the US may reduce its support.

However, acquiring an independent nuclear arsenal would involve considerable risks. Washington and Moscow could act against nuclear proliferation, which could threaten stability in Europe. Close cooperation with other nuclear states such as France and Great Britain would therefore be essential in order to develop common strategies. France, for example, has around 300 nuclear weapons but does not participate in NATO's nuclear planning group, while Great Britain relies on close cooperation with the USA.

The role of arms control

Current arms control has become even more important as more countries possess nuclear weapons, further increasing the challenges. Critics of deterrence theory argue that the non-use of nuclear weapons since 1945 does not show a clear causal connection to effective deterrence. However, the war in Ukraine shows that nuclear threats can also be interpreted as an escalation of risk, although it remains unclear whether Russia would actually be prepared to undertake such an operation.

When it comes to questions about Europe's nuclear future, it will be crucial for the United States to continue to defend itself in Europe while at the same time expanding conventional military capabilities. A comprehensive nuclear dialogue could help explore possible worst-case scenarios. But the biggest challenge is probably to shape change in such a way that Europe does not end up in a “deterrence gap” and is left defenseless against Russia’s aggressive actions, a point made by Spiegel is cited again and again.