Auteur: Thierry GARCIN
Executive summary: In the dual context of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, the only European nuclear power with France, and the strengthening of doubts about the American nuclear protection of Europe (Trump II Presidency), should we change the French nuclear doctrine, which follows its own imperatives? The central question is whether France’s “vital interests” can be extended to the rest of Europe, breaking with the fundamental principle of uncertainty. Promise something, isn’t it already lying in anticipation? And, first – heavy responsibility to history – divide the French on a strategy that has always united them?
Keywords: Dissuasion, Nuclear, De Gaulle, France, Europe, NATO.
Abstract: In the dual context of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union – London is the only European nuclear power besides France – and the increasing doubts about nuclear protection of Europe by the United States (Trump second mandate), must the French nuclear doctrine be modified, given it has its own imperatives? The key question is to know if the notion of “vital interests” has to be enlarged to the profit of the rest of Europe, which would break with the fundamental uncertainty principle? Isn’t promising something already a lie by anticipation? And, first and foremost, wouldn’t it be be a heavy burden of responsibility before History to divide the French people on the strategy of deterrence, which has always unified them?
Keywords: Deterrence, Nuclear, De Gaulle, France, Europe, NATO.