When we talk about nuclear weapons, we tend to think in terms of the superpowers: the United States, Russia, and China. That's understandable, as those three nations hold a great deal of the world's nuclear weapons, and they aren't exactly on the best of terms with one another. But two European nations have nuclear arsenals as well, including the United Kingdom — and France. And we're all too keenly aware of what's been going on in France recently, as well as the impotence of the outgoing Macron government to do anything about it. The United Kingdom, from what indications we're seeing, isn't too far away from a similar meltdown.
This brings up one interesting question, and it's a question that had better be on the minds of the leaders of those nations, as well as the leaders of the rest of Europe, as well as the United States and, yes, Russia and China: If one or both of these countries falls to either socialist agitators or Islamic radicals...
What happens to all the nukes?
Well, first, let's take a look at how many nukes we're talking about.
By latest report, France has 290 nuclear warheads. France also has the capability of launching those devices from sea or air. About 230 of France's nukes are reportedly on submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and the remainder on air-launched cruise missiles. The United Kingdom has nearly as many, with 120 nuclear warheads ready to launch, all on submarine-launched ballistic missiles. There are also several nations hosting nuclear weapons, meaning that other countries have deployed warheads in their territory and are in control of them; those countries would be Italy (35 weapons) Turkey (20), Belgium (15), Germany (15), the Netherlands (15), and Belarus (number unknown.)
The overall picture is much larger.
Russia has the most confirmed nuclear weapons, with over 5,500 nuclear warheads. The United States follows behind with 5,044 nuclear weapons, hosted in the US and 5 other nations: Turkey, Italy, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. Total nuclear warheads owned by these 2 countries alone counts for nearly 90% of nuclear weapons in the world.
Total number of warheads for North Korea and Israel is unconfirmed. However, it has been estimated that North Korea has enough fissile material to develop between 40-50 individual weapons, while Israel has material for up to 200, with an estimated 90 existing warheads.
But for the moment, it's France and the United Kingdom that are the major worries.
Note: At this time, there's been no confirmed attempt anywhere in Europe by the malcontents to move on any military installations, to attempt to seize any weapons; there was that recent attempt on a Royal Air Force base, but that appears to have been a planned attack by terror operatives, not just a mob takeover, as we're seeing now. The goal of the people in the RAF Fairford incident appears to have been destruction, not a seizure of weapons.
Those are the numbers. Now, here's where speculation begins. What happens if the governments of the UK and France fall?
We might note that it doesn't necessarily take a mob swarming into an taking over government buildings for this to happen. History is replete with examples of countries voting themselves into tyranny. And we have seen, too recently and too often, how timid some of the leaders of Europe can be when faced with these mobs. France's President Macron is just the latest example, and if we were to characterize his reaction to this weekend's rounds of rioting and looting with one word, it would be "impotent." But if any sort of takeover of the governments of the UK or France happens, whether it be by socialist nutcases or jihadi nutcases, suddenly the world's attention had better be focused on those nuclear weapons.
The nations on the side of sanity have one big advantage: Most of France's warheads and all of Britain's devices are submarine launched. Subs already at sea can simply sail away — if their commanders are willing to ignore the orders of whatever passes for a new government and just set sail instead for, say, Norfolk. But at any given time, some of those boats will be in port, some of them alongside docks, some in dry docks, and those boats may well be seized. Here's where the nations on the side of sanity have one other advantage: Seizing control of a facility containing a nuclear weapon is one thing; making use of that nuke is quite another. It's not like taking a rifle out of an armory. There are serious security safeguards around the arming and use of these devices.
But a new government, arising from the ashes of the old, may be able to negotiate those safeguards. Then, much depends on the nature of any new government. If it's a far-left, socialist/communist government, they will use the nuclear weapons as leverage against the rest of the world. If it's an Islamist/jihadi government, they will use the nuclear weapons. Against the United States, against Israel, against who knows, but they will use them.
The member nations of NATO and, most of all, the United States, should be deep into planning how to yank these nukes away from any such revolutionary "government" in France or Britain. The odds of such a government coming to power are small but increasing, as we are reminded today with every look at international news. The odds of such a government managing to negotiate the safeguards around a nuclear arsenal and putting it to use are even smaller.
But they aren't zero. And the consequences would be horrible.
