by Rajnish Singh
Robert Oppenheimer, head of the US Manhattan Project, paraphrasing from the Hindu religious book, the Bhagavad Gita, said, "Now I have become Death, the destroyer of worlds," after witnessing the first atomic bomb explode in 1945. Now, Berlin wants to gain such destructive power, following questions over US security guarantees to Europe. German Chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Mertz said on Sunday, 9 March, that he wanted to talk to France and the UK about sharing their nuclear weapons.
Mertz, however, is not the only European leader considering nuclear options. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Friday, 7 March, “Poland must pursue the most advanced capabilities, including nuclear.” Like Germany, Poland wants to work with the UK and France to expand its nuclear deterrent. However, if populists like Nigel Farage and Marine Le Pen gain power, the UK and French nuclear umbrellas could be withdrawn, which could push Germany, Poland and other EU countries to pursue atomic weapons.
Such a development would be dangerous for the rest of the world. The Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to which all EU members are signatories, tries to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. If any European country worked towards gaining atomic weapons, it could undermine the agreement, so encouraging other nations to follow suit, including dangerous countries like Iran.
Germany, with its economic might, would be the most likely to acquire an independent deterrent first. Though it would feel safe, this could shift the balance of power within Europe. France and the UK, the only nuclear-armed states in Europe, have historically maintained a delicate equilibrium. With Germany becoming the new military powerhouse, tensions or rivalries could be created. Belin’s pursuit of nuclear bombs could also raise sensitivities with its European neighbours due to its savage behaviour during WWII. If the extreme right-wing AfD party, with its known Nazi sympathies by certain members, becomes part of a future government, these would be exacerbated and so undermine EU cohesion.
Some US military drawdown will not be surprising, especially as Europe’s armed forces become more significant. However, if Germany and others start working towards an independent nuclear deterrent, Washington could receive the wrong signal, indicating it is no longer needed as the ultimate ‘backstop’.
With more nuclear-armed countries comes the increased chances of miscalculation or accidental escalation. Multiple European nuclear powers could complicate decision-making or heighten tensions in any possible standoff with Russia. Imagine the dangers Europe would go through if something similar to the Cuban missile crisis took place in the Baltics.
The most significant global danger, however, is other countries could be triggered to pursue nuclear weapons. South Korea and Japan, fearing a nuclear-armed North Korea, and with the US also threatening not to provide security guarantees, feel compelled to push for atomic bombs. They can both economically afford weapons and, with their numerous nuclear power stations, have the resources to produce them. Currently, the West, led by the US, is trying to stop Iran from gaining nuclear weapons but will be undermined if Europeans pursue their atomic bombs.
Of course, other regional countries could take the nuclear option, especially Saudi Arabia. Already, Israel has atomic weapons, and given the powder-keg nature of the Middle East, any proliferation will destabilise the region dangerously.
Then, of course, there are India and Pakistan, both of whom have nuclear weapons and could be triggered to build up their stockpiles, which is particularly worrying since they engage regularly in wars and military operations against each other.
Given the current language and uncertainty surrounding EU-US relations, it is understandable for Germany and other European countries to see nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantee of certainty. Though Mertz, Tusk, and other Europeans are now having their Dr Strangelove moment: learning to stop worrying and love the bomb. They could risk triggering an uncontrolled global atomic arms race, making an already volatile world even more dangerous. This will undermine any possibility of working towards disarmament, which, of course, provides the ultimate safety against a nuclear apocalypse.
By: N. Peter Kramer
