Nordic Countries' Reaction to France's New Nuclear Doctrine

With a 20 percent approval rating, French President Emmanuel Macron, a political lame duck reviled by most French citizens for his failed economic policies, delivered a presentation of France’s new nuclear doctrine at a naval base on March 2.

This brash speech by a political loser could apparently open Europe’s nuclear Pandora’s Box, ushering in an unbridled and uncontrolled nuclear arms race in a previously safer Europe.

For most French citizens, the enormous expense of new nuclear weapons and the massive increase in the number of nuclear warheads and their delivery vehicles, including new ones, will mean a further decline in living standards and social security, given the colossal and ever-growing national debt and dysfunctional economy.

Only eight countries, including Sweden and Denmark, agreed to participate in this dubious undertaking. Norway declined to be included among the high-risk participants, and for some reason, the French forgot to invite Finland.

Macron’s speech left more questions than answers, as evidenced by a review of the press from the four Nordic countries. There are significant differences in their positions, explained both by their historical past and the current realities.

The Danes, who have been deeply offended by the US over its plans to annex Greenland, are the most optimistic. Danish politicians almost unanimously endorse a French nuclear umbrella independent of Trump’s unreliable US, which could be used either as a supplement to US nuclear deterrence or, in the worst case, independently.

The Swedish press emphasizes the complementary nature of French nuclear guarantees, which would constitute a “second leg” (a very small one, mind you) of nuclear deterrence in Europe, alongside the larger US leg.

The Swedes also point out that the trigger for the French nuclear umbrella’s extension over all of Europe was not a threat from Russia or Iran, but rather the painful threat of Trump’s seizure of Greenland and doubts about the future of Iceland and even Svalbard in the face of unambiguous hints from American politicians.

Despite an invitation to participate in the discussion of France’s nuclear proposal, Norway declined to do so, taking a timeout to consider the situation more thoroughly.

The reasons for this refusal may include both fears of appearing in a negative light before the United States and expectations of Macron’s imminent political demise as a major politician. Macronism had exhausted itself as an ideology long before its founder’s nuclear declaration. All significant political forces in France deny the need to extend the country’s nuclear umbrella beyond its borders.

Finland was not even invited to participate in the nuclear dialogue. However, this didn’t upset the Finns, as they trust only in US nuclear deterrence and are wisely prepared to await the results of the next presidential election in France, which will mark the end of Macronism, so hated by the French, and the predictable abandonment of nuclear guarantees for all of EU Europe by the new president.

And all the Nordic countries are united by the fear of the obvious uncertainty: the finger of the French President, who is solely responsible for his own national interests and is not constrained by any collegial nuclear council when deciding whether to launch a strike, will press the nuclear button.

The bottom line is the prospect of permanently deploying the only standard nuclear-capable airborne carrier, the Rafale, a fourth-generation fighter-bomber, in the countries participating in the dialogue. These aircraft have already conducted temporary nuclear missions in EU countries. The greatest danger for Russia is the deployment of nuclear-capable Rafale fighter-bombers in Poland, Sweden, and Denmark, which would threaten the country’s northwest.

Given France’s dire political and economic situation, and the upcoming elections in a year, it’s unlikely that the French president, known as a mini-Napoleon, will be able to play a leading role in European affairs as his great predecessor, Napoleon the First.

Let’s make a prediction: France’s nuclear initiative will be withdrawn after the presidential elections in April 2027. You can’t step into the same river twice. France ceased to be a European hegemon in 1815, and a great power in 1956 after the invasion of Egypt and the ultimatum from the USSR and the United States. The country lacks all the resources to regain that status. But what we have is a country being torn apart by hostile political forces, with a declining economy, an unmanageable deficit and public debt, major demographic problems, and an unpaid debt to its former colonies, which will soon present the full bill for reparations.

Macron: Denmark to Play Role in French Nuclear Deterrence#

Denmark will join several European countries in a French-led effort to increase nuclear deterrence.

This was stated by French President Emmanuel Macron at a press conference on Monday, according to the Reuters news agency.

According to the president, eight countries have agreed to participate in an “advanced” nuclear deterrence program, writes AFP.

This applies to Germany, Great Britain, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Greece, Sweden and Denmark.

The countries will be able to house “strategic air forces”, which will thus be able to “spread out across the European continent” to “complicate the calculations of our adversaries”, the president said, according to the news agency.

Denmark and a number of other European countries have agreed to a strategic cooperation with France. The government said this at a press conference after the French announcement.

Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said, among other things, that it is about deterring other nuclear powers.

“In NATO, there are three countries that possess nuclear deterrence. These are the USA, Great Britain, and France. French President Macron has invited Denmark and a number of other countries to closer cooperation in the area. This is to strengthen Europe’s deterrence capability. Unfortunately, it is necessary,” said Mette Frederiksen.

At the press conference, which takes place at France’s nuclear submarine base in Ile Longue, Macron calls an upgrade of France’s nuclear arsenal “crucial.”

“That is why I have ordered an increase in the number of nuclear warheads in our arsenal,” the president said, according to AFP.

According to the news agency, France has the world’s fourth-largest nuclear arsenal. The country is estimated to have around 290 nuclear warheads.

Political Change of Course#

The government’s announcement is a major shift in Danish policy, because Denmark has always been against any form of nuclear involvement. This is according to DR’s defense correspondent, Mads Korsager.

“It is the case that Denmark has notoriously, militarily, been against any form of nuclear involvement. It was something that was discussed with violent sword blows throughout the 70s and 80s, and in fact, speaking of the election campaign that is underway, it was something that was the subject of a general election,” says Mads Korsager.

Minister of Defense Troels Lund Poulsen said at the press conference that if Denmark wants to take greater care of its own security, then cooperation with France is “an example of something that we should accept.”

Denmark has had a policy of no nuclear weapons on Danish soil for decades. Can the Danes count on that policy continuing? was one of the questions from the press. To this, Troels Lund Poulsen responded:

“That policy has not changed with today’s decision. I don’t think you can make a firm decision about what might happen in the future.”

“I have previously said that I am open to discussing it.”

The Minister of Defense also said, based on an assessment from the Defense Intelligence Service, that Denmark’s greater involvement in the nuclear issue does not increase the threat to Denmark.

Strengthens Overall Deterrence#

Nine European countries are involved in the cooperation. These are the two European nuclear powers, France and Great Britain, as well as Germany, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Greece, Sweden and Denmark.

Denmark and Sweden have made a joint statement, in which the Danish Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen, and the Swedish Prime Minister, Ulf Kristersson, write, among other things, that:

“The basis for our and our allies’ ability for conventional and nuclear deterrence is NATO membership, ultimately Article 5—one for all and all for one.”

“This European initiative will complement NATO’s nuclear deterrence.”

They also write that the agreement does not imply that Sweden or Denmark change their current nuclear weapons policies.

Broad Political Support#

Following the government’s announcement, there have been a number of reactions from Danish politicians.

Political leader of the Radical Left Martin Lidegaard is “strongly in favor of Europe having a stronger defense.”

“It is difficult to give firm guarantees about the future, the way the winds blow over Washington. Therefore, it does not matter that we have two places to look when it comes to deterrence.”

“I see Europe and the EU as Denmark’s closest allies,” writes Lidegaard.

The leader of the Danish Democrats, Inger Støjberg, concludes that we “live in a troubled world, and NATO is porous with Trump at the head of the table.”

Therefore, it makes sense that Denmark has agreed to enter into a new strategic cooperation on nuclear weapons with France, she believes.

“It is a big and difficult decision, but I also think it is the right decision,” she says.

We Can Manage without the USA#

“Denmark already has nuclear weapons as part of our defense through NATO—so what is new is that the French nuclear weapons come into play outside of NATO without involving the Americans.”

This is said by Mikkel Vedby Rasmussen, a professor of political science at the University of Copenhagen and a researcher in defense policy, and points out that there are many questions that need to be answered.

“As a political break, where the Europeans, led by the French, say to the Americans: ‘You know what, we can handle our own defense,’ this is big.”

He explains that we cannot deter the Russians without nuclear weapons, and that today’s announcement should be seen as an extension of conventional armament in the form of tanks and aircraft, among other things.

“As part of that armament, there must necessarily be a question of nuclear weapons, and that is the question that Macron is tackling.”

Sweden Will Fully Participate in the Dialogue#

Sweden will participate in an in-depth dialogue with European NATO countries about France’s nuclear weapons and deterrence capabilities, announces Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson.

“The talks will be about how France’s national nuclear weapons could contribute to a clearer common European deterrence so that no foreign power even thinks about trying to attack us,” says Kristersson in a video statement.

France has prepared the talks in dialogue with the US and the NATO system, emphasizes Kristersson.

“This initiative can help to supplement the collective capabilities in our part of the world.”

No Nuclear Weapons in Peacetime#

Sweden’s nuclear weapons doctrine, which was formulated when we joined NATO, will not change.

“It is based on the principle that we fully participate in all NATO planning, including that concerning nuclear weapons. But that we see no reason in peacetime to have nuclear weapons on Swedish soil,” says the Prime Minister.

Sweden also protects the international non-proliferation treaty, emphasizes Ulf Kristersson.

“We do not want more countries to acquire their own nuclear weapons.”

Political Dialogue#

The government has held a dialogue with the Social Democrats’ party leader Magdalena Andersson and the Sweden Democrats’ party leader Jimmie Åkesson before the announcement to France. The Prime Minister has also held several talks with the Supreme Commander of the Swedish Armed Forces.

The government has also informed and discussed the issue with the Nordic and Baltic countries.

“The talks that will now begin are aimed at strengthening Swedish and European security in an uncertain time.”

France is the EU’s only nuclear power and, unlike the UK’s nuclear weapons program, the French program is completely independent of the US.

Standing on Two Legs#

France will start a cooperation with several European countries, which is intended to strengthen the deterrence capacity of the entire region. Eight countries have been invited in a first step: Britain, Germany, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Greece, Denmark and Sweden.

The Danish government confirms that a new strategic cooperation is being started with France.

“It could be about exercises,” says Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen.

“This does not in any way replace NATO’s strategic cooperation, it is complementary. We stand on two legs,” says Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen.

Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson also confirms that Sweden will now conduct a security policy dialogue with France.

“The talks will be about how France’s national nuclear weapons could contribute to a clearer common European deterrence so that no foreign power even thinks about trying to attack us,” says Kristersson in a video statement.

Initially, the new cooperation will involve an exchange of knowledge and the opportunity to participate in the exercises of the French nuclear forces. But in the longer term, it could involve stationing French nuclear weapons in other countries, according to President Macron.

This will probably be in the form of nuclear-armed Rafale planes.

“Our strategic air force will thus reach further into the European continent. This deployment on European territory and cooperation with the forces of other countries makes the calculation more difficult for our adversaries and can give us clear added value in the form of deterrence. I also believe that the added value will be great for our partners,” says Macron.

However, he is careful to emphasize that it is the French president who will continue to have the sole right to press the “red button.”

The Swedish government has ruled out nuclear weapons on Swedish soil in peacetime. But in Germany there is great interest. Secret talks have been going on for several months and on Monday the French and German governments announced that they had formed a “high-level group” to coordinate cooperation on nuclear weapons between the countries. Joint exercises will take place starting later this year.

The Future of Nuclear Deterrence Is Unclear with the President Leaving in a Year#

For Macron, this is a significant success. Since 2020, he has emphasized that France’s “vital interests” have a clear European dimension—and that French nuclear weapons could therefore also defend the rest of Europe. But it was not until Donald Trump threatened Denmark with “taking over” Greenland last year that interest in cooperation suddenly became great.

Macron now has only one year left in power. The question is therefore how long-term the new security cooperation will be. Several of the leading candidates in next year’s presidential election have expressed skepticism about Macron’s plans, as they believe that France’s nuclear weapons program is only there to protect France.

Both the radical right-wing Marine Le Pen and the left-wing leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon seem, however, to have been reassured for the time being by the fact that France retains full control over nuclear weapons and is not formally committing to using them to defend other countries.

Norway Declines to Be Mentioned in Macron’s Speech#

Earlier on Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron gave a speech in which he announced that the country will upgrade its nuclear program for the first time in 30 years.

This would mean that France could station nuclear weapons with allied countries such as Sweden and Denmark—Norway was not mentioned in the speech.

Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide confirms that Norway was contacted in advance, but chose to decline to be included in the announcement.

“Our assessment was that we will think it through more thoroughly,” Eide tells NRK.

Eide emphasizes that Norway is not against such a dialogue, but that the government is concerned that nuclear deterrence primarily belongs in NATO, and that the French nuclear program is “a little on the sidelines” of NATO.

Thus, France received a different response from Norway than from neighboring countries.

“There is not much difference between us, but we are concerned that this is done in an orderly manner and not announced in a speech from Macron at a submarine base.”

According to Eide, Norway does not reject France’s initiative on nuclear deterrence, but will spend time on thorough assessments in the dialogue with the French authorities.

“Norway has a close dialogue and good cooperation with France on security and defense cooperation. It is in our mutual interest to strengthen this cooperation through a strategic partnership. Questions about nuclear deterrence are part of this dialogue,” Eide writes to Nettavisen.

Must Complement NATO#

Eide points out that Europe must take greater responsibility for its own security, and that it is therefore natural that more countries discuss deterrence with France.

“Europe must take greater responsibility for its own security. The fact that several countries are now discussing deterrence with France, one of Europe’s two nuclear powers, is a natural consequence of this,” writes Eide.

At the same time, he emphasizes that any cooperation must be close to NATO.

“In any case, cooperation with European countries must take place in a way that complements, and does not replace, NATO’s role,” writes the Foreign Minister.

Nuclear Umbrella#

France is the world’s fourth largest nuclear power and has around 290 nuclear warheads. Russia and the United States have several thousand.

Norway is currently protected by NATO’s nuclear umbrella, with nuclear weapons mainly provided by the United States, but also by the United Kingdom and France.

But Russia’s specical military operation in Ukraine, European concerns about the United States’ faltering NATO commitment and Trump’s threats to take over Greenland create uncertainty about how robust the current umbrella is.

According to Macron, the European nuclear project is taking place in “full transparency with the United States and in close coordination with the United Kingdom.”

Macron would not specify the size of the increase. He also said that France would no longer publish figures for the size of its arsenal.

Macron stressed that the decision to use French nuclear weapons should remain solely with the French president, and that the French deterrence should complement NATO’s deterrence capabilities.

Finland’s Role#

President Alexander Stubb stated in February (February 11) at a meeting of the Association of Political Journalists that Finland will not become a nuclear-weapon state.

“We are part of NATO’s nuclear weapons planning, but we are not and will not be a nuclear-weapon state,” Stubb said.

NATO’s nuclear deterrent is based on the nuclear arsenals of the United States, Britain and France. However, France does not participate in NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group (NPG) and does not share decision-making authority over the use of its own nuclear weapons.

In accordance with the NATO Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, B61-12 nuclear bombs have been deployed in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey, but the United States has full control over the use of the weapons.

According to information from Kauppalehti, European NATO countries will have to consider developing smaller nuclear weapons so that deterrence against the Russian nuclear threat in Europe would also be reciprocal and of the same magnitude.

Finland participates in maintaining NATO’s nuclear deterrent without restrictions: Finland is part of NATO’s Nuclear Policy Planning Group and participates in NATO’s annual nuclear weapons exercises.

However, participating in the exercises does not mean that Finland is automatically obligated to transport or use nuclear weapons.

In practical situations, roles are defined in NATO according to the position, will and equipment of each member state. For example, Finland’s current and future fighter jets are not equipped to transport nuclear weapons.

Lieutenant General Kim Jäämeri, who served as Finland’s military representative to NATO until the turn of the year, told Kauppalehti in December that in his opinion, Finland should not have its own nuclear weapons.

“Finland has the advantage of having US weapons at the disposal of the alliance. The geographical proximity to Russia makes their maintenance in Finland unrealistic, especially with the current systems, which are based on aircraft,” Jäämeri said.

However, he believes that there should be more discussion about nuclear weapons in Finland and that it should be more diverse.

Deploying French Strategic Air Forces in Allied Territory Would Be a Clear Change#

The biggest surprise in French President Emmanuel Macron’s nuclear weapons speech on Monday is the possible deployment of strategic air forces in allied territory, says researcher at the Institute of Foreign Affairs Jyri Lavikainen. According to him, it would be a clear change from before.

In practice, it would mean French nuclear-capable fighters. In peacetime, they do not carry nuclear weapons, but during war or a military crisis, the situation could be different.

“In a war situation, they could have nuclear weapons if France were to disperse its air force to allied areas,” Lavikainen tells STT.

“Now it is left open in which situation this would be done. But of course, every opponent must also take into account that this could indeed happen.”

He reminds us that Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson had previously said that nuclear weapons could be possible on Swedish soil during a war.

US Deterrence Is More Reliable#

Lavikainen points out that Finland’s defense policy stance on nuclear deterrence emphasizes the deterrence of the United States.

“Because that is basically what Russia values most.”

Lavikainen points out that Finland’s Nuclear Energy Act would prohibit the deployment of nuclear weapons in the country during war. He also wonders how sensible it would be to bring nuclear weapons to Finland, close to the Russian border.

Lavikainen considers France’s decision a logical solution in a changed threat environment.

“Russia has become stronger in the last decade and has become a bigger security threat to Europe. And then there is the uncertainty related to the commitment of the United States,” he says.

Lavikainen says that France’s doctrine and strategy are specifically related to defending France.

“The French themselves are clear that they define their own vital interests. All decision-making power is held by France. They are French weapons, and France decides how and under what circumstances it uses them.”

Finland Was Not Invited to Join the French Nuclear Weapons Group like Denmark and Sweden#

Finnish Defense Minister Antti Häkkänen says that Finland did not receive a timely request to join the discussions regarding nuclear weapons initiated by France, in which Denmark and Sweden, among others, are involved.

According to Häkkänen, Finland knew in advance that President Emmanuel Macron was going to give a speech on the theme and that certain countries might be mentioned in it. However, the government, the Ministry of Defense, or ministry experts had not received an official request regarding the matter.

Macron had indicated that he could join the discussions when President Alexander Stubb visited Paris a week ago, Häkkänen says. However, this came too quickly for Finland to have been able to join before Macron’s announcement on the matter on Monday.

“At this stage, it has been said that discussions are taking place with certain countries. We did not have sufficient information on this matter. We are now trying to have a discussion, get information and evaluate the matter later,” Häkkänen said on Tuesday.

Macron Kept Silent about the Real Reason for His Nuclear Proposal: Too Dangerous#

The French project is based on concerns about the extent to which Europe can rely solely on the US nuclear deterrent in the current global situation. Macron did not say this directly, of course.

Häkkänen says that Finland considers the French project “positive” and “just good.” At the same time, he emphasizes the importance of NATO’s nuclear weapons planning and therefore the US’s nuclear deterrent. France is not involved in this cooperation.

“It is important to us that this work done in NATO regarding the European NATO nuclear deterrent is as strong and undeniable as possible, and that is the case. The United States ultimately guarantees NATO’s nuclear defense, and that is important to us.”

Häkkänen also says that it has been important to Finland that the project that France has already hinted at earlier is work that complements NATO’s nuclear defense. This was also emphasized by France on Monday.

Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen also commented on the matter to HS on Tuesday.

She did not rule out that Finland would participate in the French project later.

“Anything is possible, but there is really no rush here. There is no fear of being left at the bus stop when the long-range missile is already on the horizon somewhere.”

Both Denmark and Sweden have confirmed that they are participating in the discussions initiated by France. Both countries’ statements also expressed a negative attitude towards nuclear weapons on their own soil.

Source:

Nyheder (in Danish)
JV (in Danish)
DR (in Danish)
Afton Bladet (in Swedish)
DN (in Swedish)
NRK (in Norwegian)
Dagsavisen (in Norwegian)
Nettavisen (in Norwegian)
Uusi Suomi (in Finnish)
Kouvolansanomat (in Finnish)
HS (in Finnish)