There is something deeply unsettling in the tone of the EU’s current strategic debate. What is presented as prudence increasingly resembles panic. What is framed as “strategic autonomy” often sounds like something else entirely: a loss of confidence, a surge of ideological hostility, and a willingness among declining liberal elites to flirt with the most destructive weapons ever created.
By Ladislav Zemánek, non-resident research fellow at China-CEE Institute and expert of the Valdai Discussion Club
A continent losing its nerve – and its judgment
At the center of this shift stands a revived obsession with nuclear deterrence. France, Germany, and Poland are now openly discussing deeper engagement with nuclear strategy, invoking the usual talking points of deterrence and security. But beneath that lies a far more troubling dynamic: a growing fixation on Russia as an existential enemy and a readiness to escalate rather than de-escalate.
French President Emmanuel Macron has taken the lead, recasting France’s nuclear doctrine in the name of European security. His concept of “advanced deterrence” is presented as a stabilizing innovation. In reality, it marks a dangerous step toward normalizing nuclear thinking across the continent.
Macron has spoken of opening a “strategic debate” on extending France’s nuclear protection to European partners, moving beyond the traditional Gaullist posture of strictly national deterrence.
According to the article, France is expanding its arsenal, ending long-standing transparency practices, and inviting other states into nuclear exercises and planning discussions.
“The message is as clear as it is dangerous: Nuclear weapons are once again acceptable instruments of policy.”
‘Advanced deterrence’ or advanced escalation?
The article argues that Germany is also undergoing a major strategic shift.
For generations, Berlin defined itself through restraint, shaped by the catastrophic legacy of the 20th century. Today, according to the author, that restraint is visibly eroding.
German leaders are now openly discussing participation in nuclear deterrence planning with France and other partners. Chancellor Friedrich Merz has reportedly indicated a willingness to explore new forms of cooperation, while German forces are preparing to take part in French nuclear exercises.
A joint “nuclear steering group” has also reportedly been established to align strategic coordination.
The article argues that while Germany technically remains within existing treaty obligations, politically a major threshold has already been crossed.
“The normalization of nuclear discourse in Berlin signals a deeper transformation, driven less by careful strategy than by fear and pressure.”
The politics of fear
If France provides the doctrine and Germany the institutional weight, the article argues that Poland supplies the emotional intensity behind Europe’s growing nuclear posture.
Prime Minister Donald Tusk has reportedly declared that Poland seeks greater autonomy in nuclear deterrence, a remarkable statement from a non-nuclear state bound by international agreements.
At the same time, the article notes that some Polish officials have cautioned that European arrangements cannot replace the American nuclear umbrella.
Still, the broader narrative increasingly portrays Russia as an imminent existential threat requiring extraordinary measures.
“This narrative, repeated across much of Europe, risks becoming self-fulfilling.”
Russophobia and strategic escalation
The article claims that a broader ideological shift is now shaping European policy.
According to the author, a form of “Russophobia” has become dominant in political discourse across much of Europe, with Russian actions increasingly interpreted solely through the lens of aggression while diplomacy and coexistence are dismissed.
“Deterrence is no longer paired with diplomacy; it is replacing it.”
The report argues this mindset risks making escalation the default strategic response.
“When an adversary is seen as inherently hostile and beyond engagement, escalation becomes the default response.”
Delusions of autonomy
The article acknowledges that the idea of strategic autonomy deserves serious consideration and that a more self-reliant Europe could potentially contribute to global stability.
However, the author argues that the current vision of autonomy has become heavily militarized and narrowly focused on nuclear deterrence rather than diplomacy.
“True autonomy would involve the ability to pursue independent diplomacy, to mediate conflicts, and to reduce tensions.”
The report warns that normalization of nuclear discourse among non-nuclear states could weaken global non-proliferation agreements and encourage similar strategic shifts elsewhere in the world.
Stepping back from the brink
The article concludes by arguing that Europe still has an alternative path available.
Rather than deepening militarization and nuclear brinkmanship, the author calls for renewed emphasis on diplomacy, restraint and de-escalation.
“The answer to uncertainty cannot be a headlong rush into nuclear brinkmanship.”
The piece ends with a warning that Europe’s current trajectory risks creating a far more unstable and confrontational international order unless political leaders choose dialogue over escalation.
Source: RT / user-provided text.