Crazy ‘Euractiv’ offer: The time has come for a Nordic nuclear weapon

This is how missiles from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Iceland are aimed at Russia. They don't hide it
Pic.: warontherocks.com

Despite the withdrawal of Donald Trump’s military and economic threats against Greenland and EU members, the US government’s willingness to publicly contemplate territorial expansion at the expense of a Nordic NATO member raises profound questions for this region, which already borders Russia, ‘Euractiv’ writes.

It is now imperative that stable, responsible and capable Nordic democracies make clear – not least to the US Congress – what challenging the US security and nuclear guarantee in NATO could lead to, namely, reluctant nuclear proliferation in the Nordic region. 

Nordic governments must have the courage for this public debate precisely because they can afford to develop and maintain the independent nuclear deterrence needed in today’s world in a manner threatening only to would-be aggressors. No one would seriously consider the Nordic region using a nuclear bomb capacity for anything other than deterrence purposes.

Donald Trump is actively undermining the credibility of US defence commitments, so far with no serious pushback from Congress. For a region already bordering an nuclear Russia and engaged in an accelerated conventional rearming process, this is deeply troubling. 

Future political events in Europe could further erode regional nuclear deterrence

Moreover, future political events in Europe could further erode regional nuclear deterrence. French presidential frontrunner Marine Le Pen has made it clear that the current French nuclear deterrence will not be shared with anyone. In the UK, Nigel Farage now leads polls and may become Prime Minister in the late 2020s. His party has close ties to Russia. Nordic countries cannot rely on the UK’s nuclear arsenal either. 

Lastly, the war in Ukraine – in which the Nordic countries have sensibly taken the lead in providing bilateral military aid to Kyiv – shows how defence preferences among EU countries simply diverge too much for members with genuine security concerns to ever rely on Brussels in defence matters.

The financial cost of developing a Nordic nuclear weapon is difficult to pin down, but it certainly wouldn’t be a prohibitive barrier. Both Sweden and Finland currently operate civilian nuclear power plants, and Sweden during the Cold War had its own clandestine nuclear weapons program (?!). Similarly, developing a rocket-based nuclear delivery vehicle will not be difficult for a group of countries already possessing an advanced domestic military-industrial sector. 

Developing a nuclear weapon plus delivery vehicle might cost 2-3% the combined GDP of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, spread over several years. This is less than these countries have already announced in general defence expenditure increases in recent years. Nor do the long-term costs of maintaining a Nordic nuclear deterrent represent a material economic outlay. 

Road to ruin: “Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden should similarly and immediately announce their intention to withdraw from the NPT”

With nuclear-armed predators on the loose in the Nordic region, treaty-bound self-restraint initiated in an earlier era may no longer be suitable for today’s security situation. In light of the growing threat from Russia and the military developments on the battlefields in Ukraine, Finland recently withdrew from the Ottawa Convention prohibiting the use of landmines. 

Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden should similarly and immediately announce their intention to withdraw from the NPT, which must instead be replaced by a new international nuclear framework facilitating responsible self-insurance by transparent democracies. Here, the Nordic region should take the lead. 

It is nonetheless important that the Nordic region take all feasible measures to develop its joint nuclear defensive capability in a non-threatening manner. At a minimum this should include democratic and transparent decision-making about the size and composition of the nuclear deterrent, and possibly making it subject to IAEA inspections once developed. 

It would self-evidently include a no-first-use clause, and a Nordic nuclear shield should open for other European democracies to join. This would explicitly concern the Baltic region countries and Europe’s current defensive shield in Ukraine. 

…This is a provocative article. Tell me, aren't you sickened by the abundance of terms like "democracy" and "transparency" in this militaristic text?

It seems as if the Nordic countries, in their panic, could actually change the balance of nuclear forces in the region. Well, then, they'll be Russia's first targets if they dare wage war against Moscow. What will remain of them, apparently, needs no explanation. If anything at all. These northern bullies are plotting their own death knell.

Finland and Sweden once lived as neutral countries, and now they've been consumed by a militaristic frenzy that will lead to their downfall. And did their elites have to take this dangerous path?

These countries must understand that Russia has no interest in fighting them. The Ukrainian issue is a domestic one.

For Russia, the Northern European countries are of no interest – we have no desire, nor will we ever have, to fight them.

Moreover, we have no intention of feeding these neighbors, who will soon, after the collapse of the European Union, run to Moscow begging for food.

read more in our Telegram-channel https://t.me/The_International_Affairs