French nuclear deterrence in Norway could make us a prime target, warns aid group

The Norwegian People's Aid, through its Secretary General Raymond Johansen, has voiced strong opposition to French President Emmanuel Macron's proposal for "forward nuclear deterrence," which would involve the temporary deployment of French nuclear-armed aircraft in Norway and other European nations. Johansen argues that this policy, while framed as a security guarantee, would instead transform Norway into a prime target, significantly increasing the risk of catastrophic consequences.

“

If one is to say yes to getting a target on one's back, one should be very sure that it creates more security, not more risk.

Academics James Cameron and Even Hellan Larsen have countered Johansen's position, suggesting that the very presence of the security guarantor's nuclear weapons on Norwegian soil would make it politically and strategically harder for France to abandon Norway in a crisis. They posit that the shared risk enhances the credibility of the security guarantee. However, Johansen respects their academic stance but remains unconvinced, emphasizing that the potential consequences of nuclear weapon use are too dire to rely on deterrence alone.

“

precisely the fact that the security guarantor's nuclear weapons can be located, and thus be a target, on our territory, makes it politically and strategically far more difficult for the guarantor to abandon us. The risk we take contributes to a more credible security guarantee.

From the perspective of the Norwegian People's Aid, this proposal represents a dangerous gamble. The organization believes that prioritizing nuclear deterrence over de-escalation and risk reduction is a flawed security strategy. The potential for escalation and unintended incidents, as well as the devastating impact on people and the environment should deterrence fail, are paramount concerns that cannot be overlooked. The aid group insists that a thorough and honest assessment of risks versus security benefits is essential for Norwegian policymakers.

“

The potential consequences of being wrong about nuclear weapons are so catastrophic that it is simply no longer sufficient to point to the fact that nuclear deterrence 'can' work.