Is Germany on the Path to Nuclear Armament in Response to Russian Threats?

In 1989, the West was jubilant with the idea that communism was dead after the fall of the Berlin Wall. A cursory glance at events since then indicates it is anything but dead. Russia and China have become increasingly bellicose as Western nations lazily slumber, steeped in the good life replete with pleasure and easy money. However, the specter of communist aggression is more evident now than in the last seventy years, and little has been done to protect Europe and our allies from attacks as the communist behemoth advances.

The debate as to whether Germany should build nuclear weapons has gained traction due to concerns over Russian expansionism and the potential for American disengagement from Europe. Amid calls for collaboration with nuclear powers like France and the U.K., Germany is contemplating the need for its own nuclear deterrence. The discussion is not limited to Germany, as global policymakers assess proliferation risks amidst expanding arsenals considering North Korea’s, Iran’s and China’s threats.

Recent intelligence suggests that Russia’s interest in space-based nuclear weapons has intensified the deliberation. While Germany historically shunned nuclear armament, recent geopolitical shifts have prompted a serious reevaluation. This dialogue was ignited by U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump’s stance on NATO defense spending, underscoring the issue’s urgency. The hard truth is, our European NATO allies have shirked their responsibility to protect their sovereignty, relying heavily on U.S. intervention.

With increasing uncertainty in global security, countries like Germany are facing difficult decisions about their national defense strategies. The debate over whether Germany should have its own nuclear weapons raises important questions about the role of military power and deterrence in international relations, which are fundamental precepts of sovereignty. One argument in favor of German possession of nuclear weapons is the need for greater self-sufficiency and independence from other nuclear powers.

German Finance Minister Christian Lindner posed this question in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: “Under which political and financial conditions would Paris and London be willing to maintain and expand their strategic capacities for our collective security? And conversely, how much are we ready to contribute?”

Other politicians, such as Friedrich Merz, leader of Germany’s major opposition party, the conservative CDU, and Katarina Barley, the center-left SPD’s candidate for the European election, have urged Germany to pursue a European nuclear deterrent independent of the U.S., show a growing sentiment to take Russian threats seriously.

Senior government officials revealed that Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, and Defense Minister Boris Pistorius remain doubtful about the potential for increased nuclear collaboration with France and the U.K. and the viability of such an approach.

According to these top leaders, the growing nuclear threat from Russia calls for relying on NATO’s existing nuclear deterrence strategy and substantial investments in improved air-defense systems as the current ideal response.

Conversations in Berlin marked a shift from four years ago when French President Emmanuel Macron proposed discussions with Germany and other European nations about extending Paris’s nuclear umbrella to cover all of NATO in return for assistance in funding the weapons. Although Germany lacks nuclear weapons, its warplanes are configured under NATO’s nuclear-sharing agreements to deploy U.S. nuclear weapons stationed in Germany; however, the authority to deploy these weapons rests solely with the U.S.

Donald Trump has raised concerns about Washington’s commitment to NATO allies who are not meeting defense spending requirements. Germany, favoring U.S. nuclear deterrence within NATO, fears a shift to France’s umbrella might reduce U.S. military presence in Europe.

With Trump challenging NATO’s core principle, German policymakers see increased vulnerability compared to France and the U.K. Some anticipate U.S. disengagement from Europe regardless of the election outcome, a move that would not benefit the U.S. or our allies.

To address potential threats, conservatives are suggesting that Germany should reconsider its nuclear stance, especially amid Russian advancements and geopolitical shifts, particularly in light of the unprovoked assault on Ukraine. Calls for Germany to purchase nonactive nuclear warheads from the U.S. to bolster NATO’s deterrent capabilities have emerged and would be a wise move to send Russia the right message.

This proposal entails combining resources with France and the U.K. to enhance the collective nuclear arsenal, with the explicit intent of deterring communist aggression. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has shifted its focus from nuclear deterrence to conventional defense. However, recent events have shown that nuclear weapons still play a crucial role in international security and stability.

The rise of non-state actors and new technological advancements have made it necessary for NATO to adapt and modernize its capabilities. As such, discussions about extending the nuclear umbrella to non-nuclear NATO members have surfaced. This would strengthen the alliance’s deterrence capabilities and demonstrate solidarity and unity among its members. This action is essential to let the global communist bloc know that NATO is willing to fight.

As Germany reassesses its nuclear stance, there are also calls for a renewed commitment to arms control and disarmament efforts from the pacifist sectors of NATO members. Some argue that Germany, as a key player in European security, should lead in promoting international dialogue and cooperation on these issues, even though this attitude does not work and is mainly responsible for the current dilemma, as Russia has no intention of keeping agreements.

A senior German official said Germany’s having its own weapons was not being considered for now. However, he acknowledged that it might someday become necessary for Berlin to deter an aggressive Russia credibly. Having fifteen divisions and modern battle tanks is notable, but without a nuclear deterrent, facing an enemy who not only has one but is also willing to kill you with it renders those divisions useless.

Some critics argue that a purely European nuclear deterrent for NATO would not be credible without Germany joining others in developing the weapons, deploying them and participating in the command structure that would decide on their use. This is of particular importance because of Germany’s proximity to Russia.

Some may argue that developing a national nuclear deterrent is unnecessary and that Germany can rely on other forms of defense, such as economic and diplomatic measures. These measures have not worked since 1917 and there is little hope, they would have any meaningful effect now. However, it is essential to recognize the unique role that nuclear weapons play in deterrence. Nuclear weapons have a massive psychological impact on potential aggressors and serve as a strong deterrent against any form of attack.

Moreover, the long-term implications of not having a national nuclear deterrent are worth considering. With the growing threat of cyber warfare and other forms of asymmetric attacks, relying solely on conventional defense measures may not always be sufficient. In such scenarios, having a nuclear option as a last resort can provide an added layer of protection for Germany and its NATO allies. This notion is underscored by the development of nuclear weapons in countries like China, Iran, and North Korea.

Germany faces significant legal, practical and political barriers to becoming a nuclear power. The nation relinquished nuclear weapons under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, a commitment reaffirmed in the September 1990 agreement that facilitated Germany’s reunification. However, the circumstances that warranted this treaty have changed substantially, rendering it null.

Regardless of possessing nuclear capabilities, Europe and Germany must enhance their defense capacities swiftly, as it could already be too late. Europe in general, especially Germany, is now suffering from the bad decision of feeding the Bear, hoping to get mauled last.