Russia’s top diplomat has compared Emmanuel Macron to Napoleon and Hitler after France’s President offered to extend his nation’s nuclear protection to European allies and invited military chiefs to discuss putting boots on the ground in Ukraine.
The Kremlin’s fury came hours after Macron, other EU leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met in Brussels for a landmark summit touted by participants as the start of a new era for European security.
The discussions in the Belgian capital demonstrated Europe’s recognition that its security is no longer guaranteed as leaders agreed measures to free up hundreds of billions of euros for military spending by loosening the bloc’s budget restrictions.
Following the summit, Macron told reporters he had been approached by several of his European counterparts who were interested in exploring the possibility of France sharing its nuclear deterrent.
He also confirmed that Paris would host ‘exploratory’ talks with EU defence chiefs starting on Tuesday about the possible deployment of European forces in Ukraine once a peace deal is signed.
The revelations, which came as French Mirage fighter jets were deployed by Ukraine’s air force for the first time to down Russian missiles and drones, led the Kremlin to deliver a venom-tongued retort to the French President.
‘Unlike his predecessors, who also sought to fight with Russia – Napoleon, Hitler – Mr. Macron does not act very diplomatically,’ Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said at a press conference yesterday, echoing similar comments made by Vladimir Putin.
‘It was very strange to me to hear that Mr. Macron, in an aggressive manner, continuing the work of Napoleon, who wanted to conquer Russia.’
Earlier this week, Lavrov had chastised Macron for floating the idea of sharing France’s nuclear weapons with other European nations.
‘Of course it is a threat against Russia. If he sees us as a threat… and says that it is necessary to use a nuclear weapon, is preparing to use a nuclear weapon against Russia, of course it is a threat,’ Lavrov declared.
Now, with some analysts warning that Europe ‘needs to be on par with Russia’s 1,550 strategic warheads’ should America withdraw its so-called nuclear blanket, experts have outlined the formidable challenges that must be overcome if the EU – and Britain – are to strengthen their faltering nuclear deterrent.
French President Emmanuel Macron speaks at a press conference during a European Council meeting in Brussels, Belgium, 06 March 2025
Russia test-launches one of its new Sarmat nuclear missiles, which it claims can carry up to 15 warheads, strike any country on earth, and cannot be stopped by current defences
Russian President Vladimir Putin holds the keys to the world’s largest stockpile of nuclear weapons
Tale of the tape
Russia‘s war in Ukraine is now raging into its fourth year as Putin calls for peace in one breath, then unleashes another wave of missile strikes in the next.
Yet, despite Moscow‘s relentless aggression on Europe’s eastern flank, it is the shifting policies of the continent’s most powerful ally that have truly set alarm bells ringing.
Donald Trump is openly working to dismantle decades of transatlantic security cooperation on Russia, and there are fears that Washington could soon abandon its commitment to protecting Europe that has lasted since the Second World War.
NATO’s nuclear deterrence is heavily reliant on the US, which possesses the world’s second largest stockpile of operational nuclear warheads.
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the US has more than 3,700 operational warheads, though fewer than half are actively deployed.
Several hundred of these are stationed across Europe, primarily in Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands, as part of NATO’s deterrence posture.
But Washington retains ultimate control over the use of these weapons.
Any suggestion that the US could withdraw support from NATO is therefore a serious cause for concern for European defence chiefs, who fear their nuclear capabilities could be effectively erased in a matter of weeks.
When American weapons are removed from the equation, there are only NATO member states that have a nuclear arsenal of their own – Britain and France.
According to SIPRI, the UK has some 225 warheads at its disposal, but only 40 of these are ready to deploy at any one time.
France has a slightly larger stockpile of around 290.
By contrast, Russia commands a vast nuclear arsenal exceeding 5,000 warheads, with at least 1,550 strategic warheads deployed under the terms of the New START treaty.
However, Putin suspended Moscow’s participation in the treaty in 2023, raising concerns that even more warheads could be activated at a moment’s notice.
Analysts from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) conclude that, as things stand, ‘the French and British nuclear forces are a complement to US extended deterrence… they would not constitute a viable solution in the event of an abrupt withdrawal of US nuclear forces.’
An unarmed Trident II D5LE missile launches from the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine USS Wyoming (SSBN 742) off the coast of Cape Canaveral
HMS Artful an Astute-class nuclear-powered fleet submarine is manoeuvred at His Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde on March 04, 2025 in Faslane, Scotland
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, meets French President Emmanuel Macron on the sidelines of the European Council to discuss continued support for Ukraine and European defense, in Brussels
An unarmed Trident II D5LE missile launches from the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine USS Wyoming (SSBN 742) off the coast of Cape Canaveral, Florida
Logistical and structural concerns
Clearly, Europe’s nuclear stockpile pales in comparison to that of Moscow.
But it is not just the size of the proverbial stick that poses a problem. Europe’s ability to swing it is also significantly reduced.
Unlike the US, which spent decades constructing a vast nuclear infrastructure spanning land, sea, and air, Europe’s nuclear forces suffer from major logistical constraints.
France’s 290 warheads are split between sea and air-based platforms.
The majority are deployed aboard its fleet of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), while around 50 are mounted on cruise missiles that can be launched by French bombers.
The UK, however, relies solely on its four Vanguard-class SSBNs to deploy its warheads, and of the 225 at Westminster’s disposal, only 40 are ready to launch at any one time.
Neither country has any land-based nuclear missile silos, and France’s air-launched nuclear weapons are all stationed with planes at domestic airfields.
This dramatically restricts Europe’s ability to project nuclear force and its ability to react effectively in a crisis situation.
Compounding these limitations is Britain’s reliance on American technology.
As nuclear weapons expert Norman Dombey put it: ‘Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent is neither British nor independent.’
‘Both its missiles and its warheads are dependent on the US and US design.’
This uncomfortable reality raises serious questions about how reliable the UK’s deterrent would actually be in a crisis, particularly if Washington’s commitment to European security continues to wane.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer and France’s President Emmanuel Macron hold a meeting during a summit at Lancaster House on March 2, 2025 in London
Royal Navy personnel in the control room on HMS Vigilant, submarine on January 20, 2016 in Rhu, Scotland. HMS Vigilant is one of the UK’s fleet of four Vanguard class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines
The politics of non-proliferation
In recent years, there have been rumblings that Britain and France could potentially extend their nuclear capabilities to other allied powers in Europe.
Such a notion was first floated by France’s President Emmanuel Macron in 2020, when he invited European partners to engage in a strategic dialogue on ‘the role played by France’s nuclear deterrence in collective security’.
Then, in the months following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Germany’s then-finance minister Wolfgang Schaeuble suggested his nation could make a financial contribution to bolster ‘the nuclear deterrent at the European level’.
Now though, these rumblings are growing louder.
German Chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz last month openly declared he would explore the possibility of forming a nuclear triumvirate with Britain and France during a speech in which he delivered a stark assessment of Europe’s vulnerability in the event of a US withdrawal from NATO.
Merz, who is currently trying to get the outgoing Bundestag to vote through a constitutional change that would allow Germany to dramatically boost defence spending, said: ‘We have to talk to the British and French whether their nuclear protection could also be extended to us.
‘(This is) an issue that the French government has repeatedly raised with the German government… We must talk to each other about what that could look like.’
Macron on Wednesday reiterated his openness to enter discussions with Germany and other EU nations about the prospect of extending his nuclear umbrella.
However, there are several hurdles to be negotiated before France or Britain could enter into a warhead-sharing agreement with European allies.
France maintains complete sovereignty over its nuclear forces, meaning Paris is under no obligation to deploy its strategic warheads in the event that a NATO ally comes under attack.
What’s more, for all of Macron’s bluster, his country’s current nuclear doctrine stipulates that its warheads exist to protect France’s national interests and will not be shared with other countries.
Friedrich Merz (R), German chancellor-in-waiting and leader of Christian Democratic Union party (CDU), has called on Europe to prepare for a future without US security support in the face of Russian aggression in Ukraine
This image taken with a slow shutter speed on Oct. 2, 2019, and provided by the U.S. Air Force shows an unarmed Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missile test launch at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California
His own defence minister, Sebastien Lecournu, reminded him and everyone else of that fact just this morning, declaring that Paris’ nuclear capability ‘is French – and it will remain French’.
Emmanuelle Maitre, an analyst at the French Foundation for Strategic Research (FRS), added that although there is a ‘compatibility’ between French national interests and those of the rest of western Europe, France’s president has given ‘no assurance, no guarantee’ of nuclear protection to his allies.
Britain’s nuclear forces meanwhile are assigned for the collective defence of NATO, according to the government’s most recent integrated defence review.
But, as already established, the UK’s nuclear capabilities are heavily reliant on ongoing support from Washington.
The challenges of a nuclear sharing arrangement on the continent are also compounded by regulations set out in the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT).
Under this agreement – to which the UK, France, Germany and all members of the European Union are signatories – states without nuclear weapons cannot acquire them, and states with nuclear weapons must pursue disarmament.
This means that Germany, for example, cannot legally develop nuclear weapons of its own.
Even if France moved to station some of its nuclear assets in Germany, both parties would need to consult closely with its nuclear-enabled allies and the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, before any nuclear-sharing programme could be realised.