But Friedrich Merz cautions such a move could not replace the US’s existing protective shield over Europe
Archived version: https://archive.is/newest/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/09/germany-to-reach-out-to-france-and-uk-over-sharing-of-nuclear-weapons
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
I’d love it if the yanks accidentally make Europe get our act together.
Just for context:
as if things happen naturally, this text doesn’t mention any nuclear disarment agreement.
I doesn’t look like us Brits can completely break with the US in military or intelligence terms, at least for the time being (if not foreseeable future). But closer military co-operation with the rest of Europe clearly has to happen, assuming maintenance of our nuclear capability isn’t completely reliant upon, or tied up with the US.
The Chinese are going to build their biggest embassy in Europe in London about half a mile or so from the US embassy. I’d guess the UK will continue trying to play a mediating role.
Just curious from an American here -
Why should the EU have treated the UK better during brexit? It was clear at the time that they were weakening Europe and themselves on the back of things like immigrant fear stoked by far right and Russian propaganda.
The people of the UK that voted leave or didn’t bother to vote fucked themselves didn’t they?
They did everything they could to weaken the UK. To punish the UK for deciding to leave the EU.
No quarter given.
But the reason people voted to leave the EU was the importation of cheap Eastern European labour that was used to undermine pay and conditions for British workers of every origin. Saying brexit was the result of ‘Russian interference’ is as reductionist as saying ‘Hilary’s emails’ was why people voted Trump in first time around. The bbc and others framed the debate as EU ‘liberalism’ (is that social or economic liberalism?casue political liberalism is the soft and fuzzy one covering the hard and ruthless other) v. something xenophobic. The reality on the ground was far more complex. Like in the US, the stories of poor people harmed by liberalism were ignored. They still are being. As long as they are the Reform party will continue a rise to power and you will see a UK split from EU countries further anyway.
But ok. If it was reasonable for the EU to treat the UK badly over brexit, then it is more than reasonable for the UK to give no quarter back now that the Germans are asking for the protection of our nuclear weapons.
Now, to some degree the UK is going to remain aligned with the US. Our military and intelligence capabilities seem to be very much intertwined. The alternative for the EU, a UK completely aligned with the US, Russia, and a friend of China, is the alternative to the EU winding back the harm they have intentionally caused the UK.
Perhaps they should have been reasonable when the UK decided to leave the EU.
Curiously, this “reality” of yours doesn’t mention any of the metric ton of lies told by Farage, Johnson, etc. For example, that bus claiming millions of pounds would go to the NHS after Brexit. You correctly state People are hurt by conservative policies, however Brits keep voting for them. You could have voted for Corbyn - you chose not to. Instead of keeping to ask for a special deal, after special deal after special deal as Britain did before, and during Brexit, just negotiate like normal people.
what’s the alternative to nuke sharing? Germany builds its own arsenal and you have no stake or say in it whatsoever. Does that sound more appealing to you?
I am not the slightest bit interested in the majority of your post, it is irrelevant. However I will say that I sense you might assume political affiliations I do not have.
what’s the alternative to nuke sharing? Germany builds its own arsenal and you have no stake or say in it whatsoever. Does that sound more appealing to you?
If Germany are allowed under international law to build nuclear weapons then it is their choice whether they do so or not. I don’t mind either way.
They shouldn’t. The “No” campaign ran flat-out lies about what Britain would be able to get out of negotiations, claiming we “hold all the cards”. We did not.
Well clearly we did hold cards. The very post you replied to has pointed out exactly the cards we held, and still hold.
What I will say is remainers (including the UK government charged with managing the negotiations) weakened the UK’s bargaining position just like your attitude would weaken the UK’s position going forward.
But his isn’t a brexit argument, that is a long-resolved issue.
This is about the UK’s relationship with the EU. And notice I say EU, not Europe. I read media reports conflating the EU with Europe every week. Even this week talking of EU countries creating a ‘European Army’: well if they are going to define Europe as ‘EU countries’ (a corporatist takeover of the continent, if you like lol and most certainly something that I have read done week in and week out for years) so be it. Why wouldn’t we maintain our special relationship with the US, and lean towards Russia, while maintaining our friendly relationship with China?
You reap what you sow.
Now if the EU wants the protection of our nuclear weapons they demonstrate how the have significantly changed their attitude towards the UK on an ongoing basis and the EU’s role in Europe, and they pay economically.
Off topic but not too much:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing
Countries like germany and italy already have nukes and received new ones a couple years ago. It’s technically against the law but governments bend the law as it please them.
