To the Editor:
In their article “Europe’s Bad Nuclear Options” (July/August 2025), Florence Gaub and Stefan Mair argue that the U.S. nuclear umbrella “for decades has shielded the continent from outside threats.” The underlying assumption is that having a nuclear umbrella is desirable and that nuclear deterrence theory is valid.
But nuclear weapons have not prevented conflict between nuclear states, as fighting between India and Pakistan has shown, and there are many possible explanations other than deterrence for the absence of nuclear war among such states, including luck. If one sets aside the faulty assumption that nuclear deterrence will hold, then increasing Europe’s reliance on nuclear weapons—or even just maintaining it—becomes an untenable proposition.
Instead, more European governments should join the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which bans all nuclear weapons activities. Austria, Ireland, and Malta have already joined the TPNW, which has 96 other signatories, and local governments in Berlin, Paris, and Rome have passed resolutions calling on their governments to do the same. In polling conducted by YouGov in April 2025, majorities in Denmark, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Sweden opposed their countries’ developing their own nuclear arsenals, and even higher percentages opposed American nuclear weapons being stationed in their country. As long as nuclear weapons exist, so does the risk of their use. Europe’s only good nuclear option is joining the TPNW.
Policy and Research Coordinator, International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
Loading…
