WASHINGTON — Questioning America’s decades-long commitment to guard them against a nuclear-armed Russia, European nations are looking at ways to bolster their own arsenals rather than continue to rely on the U.S., according to six senior European officials.
European leaders are discussing whether to rely more on nuclear-armed France and Britain instead of the U.S. or even develop their own atomic weapons, three of the senior European officials said. The discussions have taken on a new urgency in recent weeks as President Donald Trump, who blasted European nations in a speech at Davos on Wednesday, demands the U.S. acquire Greenland, these officials said.
French President Emmanuel Macron, whose country is the only member of the European Union with the bomb, is expected to deliver a major speech on France’s nuclear policy in the coming weeks, the officials said.
“We are discussing how to protect Europe with a nuclear deterrent with or without the United States,” one of the European officials said. Another described the discussions among European leaders about ways to guard against a nuclear-armed Russia without the U.S. as “intense and productive.”
The new push by some of America’s closest allies to chart a future for their security that doesn’t include a core tenet of U.S. support underscores how alarmed European leaders are by Trump’s increasingly hostile stance toward the continent and a growing threat from Russia. The discussions also signal shifting security dynamics in the West that could upend decades of global efforts to reduce, not enhance, nuclear proliferation.
Emma Belcher, an arms control expert and president of Ploughshares, a foundation focused on reducing the threat of nuclear weapons, said Europe is experiencing “a crisis of confidence.”
“We’ve had this system of extended deterrence and the U.S. promise to allies that if they’re attacked with a nuclear weapon, the United States would respond,” Belcher said “That has really kept nuclear weapons from spreading for decades. But the challenge right now is that it only works if allies believe that the U.S. commitment is real.”
European nations are exploring a range of options, three of the European officials said. They said those include improving France’s nuclear weaponry, redeploying French nuclear-capable bombers outside of France, and beefing up French and other European conventional forces on NATO’s eastern flank.
Another option under discussion is to equip European countries that do not have nuclear weapons programs with the technical abilities to acquire them, these European officials said.
Having the technical ability to potentially build a nuclear weapon would not violate the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but actually taking concrete steps, such as making highly enriched uranium, would.
Asked about Trump’s commitment to America’s decades-long promise to employ its nuclear arsenal if necessary to safeguard Europe against a potential Russian attack, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that Trump “has done more for NATO than anyone.” She said Trump’s push for NATO members to spend more on defense “is helping Europe take greater responsibility for its own defense.”
“The United States is the only NATO partner who can protect Greenland, and the president is advancing NATO interests in doing so,” Kelly said.
Within the NATO alliance, France and the U.K. are the only members that have nuclear weapons apart from the U.S, though their arsenals are much smaller and less capable.
The U.S. has approximately 3,700 nuclear warheads. France has about 290, which are capable of being launched from submarines and aircraft, and the United Kingdom has an estimated 225 warheads for its submarine fleet.
A former senior U.S. official said France and the U.K. lack the firepower to deter Russia on their own, dismissing the idea as “ridiculous.” Their nuclear stockpiles are “pitiful,” the official said, as they have not maintained it for several decades and relied on the U.S. nuclear umbrella.
Some European officials also are skeptical that France could provide a credible alternative to the vast American nuclear arsenal, and they worry that any changes Macron commits to make could be scrapped depending on who wins France’s 2027 elections.
Far-right leader Marine Le Pen, for instance, has said France’s nuclear arsenal should only be used for France.
In Sweden, the leader of the right-leaning Democrats and member of the country’s governing coalition, Jimmie Akeeson, said last March that “everything should be on the table,” including European countries acquiring their own nuclear weapons, amid concerns about whether Europe can rely on the U.S.
But Heloise Fayet, a research fellow at the French Institute of International Relations in Paris, suggested the discussions among European countries about establishing their own nuclear weapons programs could be more of a tactic than a reality.
“I see that more as a call for help,” Fayet said. “They’re saying, ‘Hey, help us, or we will do something crazy.’”
Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen said in an interview with NBC News that the nuclear deterrence issue is one that can be resolved within the NATO alliance.
“We are, for the time being, very reliant on the United States. And I would say it is also in the U.S. interest to have that umbrella in place and also to engage strongly within NATO,” Valtonen said. “Of course, we are open to any questions or any ideas, and especially solutions, what comes to nuclear deterrence in the future.”
Concerns in Europe about countering Russia’s nuclear arsenal also come against the backdrop of a collapse in arms control agreements between the U.S. and Russia.
In July, France and Britain announced an agreement on nuclear cooperation, dubbed the “Norwood Declaration,” but details of it are scant.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said in March that his country “is talking seriously” with French officials about coming under the protection of France’s nuclear weapons. And even before he took office, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said last year he was open to the idea of France providing a nuclear umbrella for Germany, a proposal that previous German governments rejected.
Their comments came after Macron publicly proposed to begin talks with European states to discuss how France’s nuclear capability could contribute to the security of the continent.
Dutch Foreign Minister David van Weel said in an interview with NBC News that the Netherlands is “not completely closed off” to the idea of France providing nuclear deterrence for European countries.
Other European governments, including Germany, have expressed broad interest in having France play a larger role, but they also have not outlined a definitive position.
The Dutch foreign minister, speaking to NBC News while in Davos for the World Economic Forum, added, “We still consider NATO to be the cornerstone of our security. At the same time, we do see that the world is changing and that we’re entering a world of geopolitical competition where also Europe needs to step up and needs to become more of an equal partner to the U.S. than we are right now.”
A British official declined to comment directly on nuclear weapons discussions among European nations. “Our posture is in constant review and responds to evolving threats,” the official said.
Unlike France, Britain is heavily dependent on the U.S. military for nuclear missiles and other support for its arsenal.
Macron’s expected speech on France’s nuclear policy, which could come as soon as February, could clarify what Paris is prepared to do.