Does France's nuclear umbrella protect Europe?

The United States has not mentioned a possible plan to withdraw from the nuclear umbrella that has protected the continent since the Cold War.

However, Washington’s dramatic shift in stance on Ukraine, Russia, and NATO has raised alarms across Europe about the strength of America’s decades-long commitment to European security.

The leaders of Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania – countries closely aligned with Washington – have all welcomed Macron’s offer, given the growing concerns.

The offer has been on the table for years, the difference being that France’s European partners are now interested and eager for security alternatives if US President Donald Trump abandons them.

Shortly before Germany’s snap election, Friedrich Mertz, the conservative leader of the Christian Democratic Union and the next chancellor of Germany, made a landmark statement on the future of European nuclear deterrence: “We must discuss with Britain and France—the two nuclear powers in Europe.”

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said; " Never has the risk of a war on the European continent, in the European Union, been so great, because for nearly 15 years now the threat has constantly been getting closer, and the front line has constantly been getting closer. That’s why France, President Macron, has been saying for seven years now that we must step up our defense to deter the threat. What we’re witnessing today, what we witnessed in London yesterday, was a whole portion of Europeans waking up after refusing to see the reality of things."

When asked if the French could no longer rely on the Americans to defend them, the minister replied; I think it’s in the United States’ interest, it’s even the United States natural destination to be on the side of Ukraine. If Ukraine were to capitulate, it would not only be terrible news for that country, terrible news for the Europeans, but it would be a terrible admission of weakness for the United States of America. And it’s in this spirit that we’re talking to the US administration at every level."

France is the only country in the European Union with nuclear weapons, but now the French president says he is ready to start discussions on a European nuclear deterrent.

What is France's nuclear deterrent?

30 years ago, France abandoned tactical nuclear weapons, retaining only two types: ballistic missiles on four nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines and airborne bombs.

While the French Air Force's role complements ballistic missile submarines, airborne deterrence has its own strengths.

The United States already has nuclear weapons in Europe, with tens of thousands of troops stationed at bases across the continent; this provides a range of military capabilities that Europe cannot match, from aerial refueling to nuclear parachutes.

Nuclear deterrence is enshrined in NATO’s collective defense commitments under Article 5 and has been championed by U.S. policymakers for decades, but assurances that nuclear weapons are a core part of the alliance’s deterrence strategy are not legally binding.

France is the EU’s sole nuclear power after Britain left the bloc; it spends about 5.6 billion euros ($6.04 billion) annually maintaining its stockpile of 290 submarine-launched and air-launched nuclear weapons.

It spends about 15 percent of its annual defense budget on modernizing nuclear capabilities.

This is while according to the Federation of American Scientists, the United States and Russia both have more than 5,000 nuclear warheads.

France’s nuclear deterrence doctrine is defensive, designed to provide deterrence by maintaining a credible nuclear threat and protecting France’s vital interests.

This policy means that France’s nuclear arsenal is kept at the lowest possible level and is used only in extreme self-defense situations.

Unlike the United States, France does not make a broad commitment to deter or respond to nuclear or non-nuclear threats against allies to defend them.

France has only a fraction of the number of airborne nuclear weapons that the United States can offer; any upgrade of its systems would be costly and would require significant logistical and operational changes.

This requires logistical and operational changes at a time when France is financially strapped and experts say it could take a decade for France to increase its arsenal by just 100 warheads.