Brussels, 02/11/2004 (Agence Europe) - - The European Union should support the maintaining of French and British nuclear arsenals, as part of a strategy of deterrence that will allow it to meet possible nuclear threats from third countries. It is also imperative that, in parallel, the EU begins reflection on possible responses to nuclear attacks from terrorist groups. These are the conclusions reached by André Dumoulin, researcher at the Royal Military School in Brussels during a debate, "From a Collective to a Common Response? European Security and Defence in the Era of International Terrorism", organised last Wednesday by the Western European Union (WEU) at the chamber of the Belgian Senate.
Will it be possible for the EU to one day become a power with nuclear weapons or will it have to support the nuclear arsenals of France and the United Kingdom instead? Can a debate on EU defence policy possessing a nuclear option begin "without supporting its insidious de-legitimisation?" André Dumoulin considers that "the nuclear deterrent cannot perhaps be removed from the strategy, as it can still play a role in meeting certain virtual (nuclear) threats" posed by non-European countries. In this context, France and the United Kingdom, "which legally have the right to possess a nuclear arsenal, do not intend to give it up". Mr Dumoulin pointed out that until now the EU had not been "mature enough" to get into a debate on a "possible nuclear option in European defence policy". Several Member States do not want to get involved in such a debate "either because they are opposed to the nuclear option, reflect their public opinion or are hostile to this kind of expression of power by a country".
Based on these observations, how could the EU react to possible nuclear threats from a third country? Initially, it could line up behind "France and Britain's nuclear policies" due to their
geographical proximity and the potential of their nuclear arsenals for dissuasion that can be of benefit to the whole EU. At the same time, it is imperative that it begins reflection on responses to possible nuclear threats from "decentralised terrorist networks", which are impervious to any kind of rationale of dissuasion, insofar as unlike countries, they do not have any population or real sanctuary to defend. Mr Dumoulin explained that this reflection is all the more important since the EU does not have a preventive military strategy in this area. Therefore, faced with such a threat, two options come to the fore: the EU can "fold its arms" and do nothing until after an attack, or the EU and some of its Member States can react in a "pre-emptive way" to get rid of the threat without using the nuclear option and without asking permission from the United Nations, given the urgency of the situation. Mr Dumoulin considers that given the "impossibility of getting an agreement with 25 members" for such pre-emptive action, the Union would have to accept casualties of hundreds if not thousands of its citizens, before it reacted. (Source: our publication, Atlantic News).