The Americans will not be around forever: Does Europe need an atomic bomb?

Germany is holding confidential talks with nuclear powers France and Great Britain on how to ensure the protection of Europe if the United States falls away as a protecting power, writes the weekly SPIEGEL.

And this despite the fact that in public appearances, Social Democratic Chancellor Olaf Scholz seems to be pinning all his hopes on the defeat of Donald Trump in the elections.

Because, as the respected Hamburg weekly writes, Trump has never hidden that he despises the construction of the NATO military alliance, in which the Americans contribute by far the most, mainly in order to protect Europe.

Why should the Americans protect Europe?

"Angela, you owe me a trillion dollars," Trump allegedly told former Chancellor Angela Merkel during a meeting in 2017, referring to the fact that for years Germany spent less than two percent of GDP on the military, as stipulated in NATO.

The matter, commented Spiegel, culminated during the current campaign in the USA.

During a performance in South Carolina – where he again convincingly won the Republican race - Trump said he would "encourage" Russia to "do whatever it wants" to countries that don't pay enough for defense.

As Spiegel writes, it's not just about Trump - whoever is in the White House, in the long term, Europe cannot rely on the Americans providing it with almost free military and atomic protection.

Sumantra Maitra, an expert at the hard-line conservative Center for American Reconstruction, says the same. He states that the Europeans will only be left stranded if war breaks out over Taiwan, so the US will concentrate entirely on the Far East.

Maitra suggests that Europe should take care of its own security to the greatest extent. "I don't know what's controversial about that," he tells SPIEGEL.

"How can any American president explain to a poor voter in Ohio or West Virginia that it is in the vital interest of the US to protect Belgium - a country with relatively high welfare benefits but one of the lowest defense benefits in NATO?"

Does Europe need a bomb?

Spiegel therefore raises the question whether Germany and Europe should prepare for a future in which they can no longer rely on Washington, when a major war has already returned to Europe, due to Russian aggression against Ukraine. And, does Europe need its own atomic bomb?

That debate was recently initiated by Katarina Barli, the holder of the list of Soltz's Social Democrats in the elections for the European Parliament. A controversial discussion broke out, in which many took her side, and many harshly criticized her, claiming that the nuclear shield over Europe can only be guaranteed by the Americans.

Although he has certain reservations, the famous professor Carlo Massala from the Bundeswehr University of Munich says: "We need this discussion."

In response, Chancellor Scholz publicly stated several times that the nuclear shield over Europe already exists, that it is guaranteed by NATO and the USA.

Scholz, Spiegel writes, copied Angela Merkel in many ways, even in a bad way. Just as she believed that cheap Russian gas would always arrive, so Scholz believes that she will always be able to rely on Washington in matters of defense.

French arms for the whole continent?

The German weekly writes about one possible scenario – that the French nuclear arsenal becomes European. That option is openly offered by President Emmanuel Macron, but with the risk that Marine Le Pen will come to power in Paris in 2027 and nothing will come of those plans.

Some talks are apparently taking place, according to Spiegel, although implementing the idea would take years and would likely be met with bitter arguments within the EU.

Spiegel also writes about the "hole" in the French (and British) nuclear arsenal - they don't have tactical bombs, those of slightly lower power that can be used in the event of an emergency. They already have only strategic ones, those that would cause a total nuclear war of destruction.

But, as Carlo Massala says, the French bombs are the only chance for Europe to build its own arsenal, by having all countries share in the costs.

Under Scholz, the least popular chancellor since such polls have been conducted, Berlin seems to be publicly suppressing all these issues, according to Spiegel. And he wonders, what does burying your head in the sand and eternal faith in Americans lead to?

What does a shield look like?

The so-called nuclear shield over Europe is actually a "deterrent" system. According to the system - we have bombs, so you must not attack us first because we will respond.

That system, experts agree, prevented the Cold War from turning hot for decades.

The United States currently has around 150 nuclear warheads ready for use on the European continent. They were put into NATO service, unlike the French atomic weapons, which are under national command.

Other NATO members participate in the shield in various ways. Let's say, dozens of those American bombs are at Bichel Air Base in Germany, and German pilots would have the obligation to fire atomic weapons in case of emergency.