Proponents of integrating French nuclear deterrence into a broader European strategy argue that it is a vital step toward achieving true strategic autonomy. By reducing total reliance on the United States, European nations can ensure their security remains stable regardless of shifts in American domestic politics. This perspective emphasizes that a continent-wide defense strategy is the only way to maintain influence in an increasingly volatile global security environment.
Advocates point out that France is the only remaining nuclear power in the European Union, making its arsenal the most logical foundation for a regional deterrent. By formalizing this cooperation, Germany and other EU members could create a more predictable security architecture. This would not necessarily replace NATO, but rather complement it, providing a necessary insurance policy that ensures Europe can defend itself if the transatlantic bond weakens.
Furthermore, supporters argue that this move would strengthen the political cohesion of the European Union. By sharing the burden and the responsibility of nuclear deterrence, member states would be forced to align their foreign and security policies more closely. This integration could lead to a more unified and powerful voice on the world stage, allowing Europe to act decisively in its own neighborhood without waiting for external approval.
Ultimately, this view holds that the risks of inaction are far greater than the risks of closer cooperation. As global threats evolve, relying on a single external power is increasingly viewed as a strategic vulnerability. Proponents believe that by embracing a French-led nuclear component, Germany can help lead the transition toward a more resilient and self-sufficient European defense posture.