2 ms·
You just don't ratify it, simple. The US does not ratify treaties all the time, especially now. Coming under the French nuclear umbrella explicitly means that
by fakedang 9mo ago
You just don't ratify it, simple. The US does not ratify treaties all the time, especially now.
Coming under the French nuclear umbrella explicitly means that if a country is under extreme threat of nuclear attack, France will 100% retaliate. Unlike the current scenario where even if the country is an EU ally, France can still choose to refuse.
Later down the line, France could even choose to delegate nuclear hosting to those countries, like the US does with Turkey and the like. Obviously those nations don't get access to the codes.
At the end of the day, everything works on the basis of trust, and while the US has broken its covenant, the EU countries have not, especially not with each other.
- butterknife 9mo agoI would not be so sure with the 100%. France had a mutual defence treaty with Czechoslovakia in 1938. They not only chose not to honor it but U turned all the way and explicitly let Hitler occupy it. Would you trust them in crunch time mere 90 years later?
- browsingonly 9mo agoI think Estonia would be mad to think France will risk Paris to save Tallinn from being occupied.
- fakedang 9mo agoFrance will not risk Paris, but if Moscow launches a nuke on Tallinn and Estonia is in the French nuclear umbrella, then France will retaliate by launching its own nuke. That's what being under a nuclear umbrella means. Of course, Russia won't waste its first strike on Tallinn. Their first strike will be aimed at French nuclear facilities if it comes to that. Again, that's what offering a nuclear umbrella entails.
- fakedang 9mo agoThat's the difference between having a supranational organization like the EU and NATO vs mere treaties. Also backstabbing was much more common back then, not so much now. The US is now uniquely upending the current regime by taking actions against allies and betraying their trust.