I proposed before Brexit, and have proposed again in the context of rejoin movements:
The UK moving Trident launch control under the EU umbrella and including (a large portion of) the cost of Trident upkeep in the contribution to the EU would allow a lot of face saving on all sides and make more sense than the UK having a independent deterrent.
I proposed before Brexit, and have proposed again in the context of rejoin movements:
The UK moving Trident launch control under the EU umbrella and including (a large portion of) the cost of Trident upkeep in the contribution to the EU would allow a lot of face saving on all sides and make more sense than the UK having a independent deterrent.
@david_chisnall
LAUNCH CONTROL under an EU UMBRELLA? And who on earth decides a launch then?
As I understand it, there are already plans for a unified EU military command, which have been accelerated as NATO becomes less reliable. And existing mutual-defence EU treaties that would provide a minimum threshold for launch authorisation. The exact details are something I'd expect would be negotiated over many months by diplomats, not defined in a Mastodon post (and especially not one written by me).
@david_chisnall @rikefranke Unless I'm mistaken, the UK nukes are under the nuclear plan group umbrella of Nato, and have long term technical dependencies to the US, so it might not be so easy to unmoor them from the USA.
But in addition, nukes are not a military weapon, they are a political one. The EU has some military C2 capabilities (which might still rely on Nato standard links and crypto which is probably among the top priority to fix), but it doesn't have any legitimate political authority that can act as the **political** commander in chief.
The Nuclear Weapon button is under the control of a political entity like the POTUS, the French president, the UK Prime Minister.
Nobody has any similar political legitimacy in the EU to be entrusted with the nuclear fire.
I think that's the point of Ulrike Franke's message.
@david_chisnall @rikefranke (And I think they'd be a much more viable path using the French nukes rather than the UK's, French nukes are entirely independent and sovereign, even in their design, manufacturing and maintenance).
However, the strict limitation of France's arsenal, with the dismantling of all facilities producing military grade fissile material might be an issue for a EU wide deterrent.
(France has ~300 head according the latest political communications, and the arsenal maximal size, and thus the size of the military grade fissile material pool, of 500 heads (not all of which are available for deterrence at a given time, due to warhead refurbishing and submarine patrol and maintenance cycles).
@david_chisnall @rikefranke As someone in favour of a strong Europe, I do think we need to push for institution reforms such that there is an EU executive with a solid legitimacy, which would then be a suitable commander in chief of EU armed forces, and in the longer term be legitimate to have the nuclear button.
(But Nuclear deterrence in the EU would probably come afterwards)
