- Research Paper: “NATO’s Nuclear Posture Review: Nuclear Sharing Instead of Nuclear Stationing”, by Karl-Heinz Kamp.
NATO has to find a new nuclear consensus. Some Alliance members doubt the wisdom of keeping US nuclear bombs stationed in Europe, while for others they constitute the backbone of the US nuclear umbrella safeguarding the Alliance.
To harmonize these differing views, NATO has started a nuclear posture review process – the so-called “Deterrence and Defense Policy Review”. The challenge will be to address the crux of the nuclear question, which is “how to deter whom with what?”. Against this background, does the credibility of the American nuclear commitment in defence of its non-nuclear NATO Allies require the physical presence of nuclear weapons on European soil? Can American nuclear protection for NATO be kept up simply by US strategic nuclear weapons stationed on submarines or in the American homeland (as is the case with the US nuclear umbrella over Japan, South Korea or Australia)?
This latest study by the Research Division concludes that it is not so much the physical presence of nuclear weapons that makes the US commitment credible, but to a large degree what is called “nuclear sharing” or “nuclear participation”.
For decades the United States has provided the Allies with information on its nuclear strategies and concepts. In addition, Washington has made provision for nuclear consultations and facilitated common nuclear planning.
If these mechanisms of nuclear sharing can be maintained and updated to today’s requirements, NATO can keep up a credible nuclear deterrence capability without any need for US nuclear bombs stationed in Europe.
More Research Division Publications…
NDC Public Affairs office
NATO Defense College