According to Russian satellite news, on October 17 local time, despite the repeated warnings of the Russian government, the NATO annual regular nuclear threat force exercise "firm noon" officially kicked off at Klein-Brogel Air Force Base in Limburg Province, Belgium. According to foreign media citing NATO statement, the military exercise will last until October 30, with more than 60 military aircraft from 14 countries participating in the exercise, and the exercise scope is concentrated over Belgium , the United Kingdom and North Sea and other places. At the same time, according to the US media "Power" website, in late October, the Russian army will hold an annual nuclear exercise code-named "Grom". Although the above two nuclear deterrence exercises are within the scheduled plan, the recent ups and downs in Russia and Ukraine wars and the fierce confrontation between various parties on nuclear weapons really forced the outside world to be vigilant. Interestingly, NATO's nuclear exercises seem to be huge in scale and fierce in the future, but if you analyze them carefully, the outside world can still see a trace of "division" from it!
(It is reported that in this routine nuclear threat force exercise, the US military will send B-52 strategic bombers located in the Minnot Air Force Base in North Dakota to assist)
The NATO organization established under the main framework of Europe, and the nuclear policy it pursues has lost its independence from the very beginning. The main reason is that only the United States in NATO has a "trinity" nuclear counterattack force system, and Britain and France only have four strategic nuclear submarines . In addition, France's Rafale fighter can carry nuclear missile , but it is gone.
(Two ordnators are mounting the B-61 tactical nuclear bomb to the wing under F-16 fighter . The B-61 tactical nuclear bomb is one of the best representatives of the United States' low-equivalent nuclear weapons)
Against this background, NATO's nuclear policy and nuclear strategy form a deep bond with the United States. In other words, NATO is not only a specific tool for the United States to implement nuclear deterrence/strikes on other countries, but will also bear the many spillover effects and unpredictable consequences caused by this. It should be noted here that the United States will provide a much-needed nuclear barrier at a critical moment, so the United Kingdom is happy to see it. The US nuclear policy/strategy has a characteristic, that is, it is deeply influenced by previous decision-makers and is full of great uncertainty, which poses huge hidden dangers to world security. As the previous President Trump as an example, he believed that the US nuclear policy should be based on "vigorously strengthening and expanding nuclear weapons", so equipment such as the next generation ballistic missile nuclear submarine , stealth strategic bombers, land-based ballistic missiles and low-equivalent nuclear weapons showed an unprecedented strong development posture. In particular, low-equivalent nuclear weapons, which are well known as tactical nuclear weapons, are deeply favored by the Trump administration and are regarded as the only magic weapon to improve the flexibility and responsiveness of the United States' nuclear power.
(The picture shows the imagination of the next generation of the US military intercontinental ballistic missile LGM-35A "sentinel" and will take over the replacement of the "militia" and take over the battle sequence of the US land-based nuclear force)
takes over the throne of Biden . In terms of nuclear policy/strategy, it was slightly stable because of the heavy influence of "Obamaism", which was mainly reflected in his own commitment to large-scale reduction of the number of nuclear weapons and promote the inclusion of "not using nuclear weapons first" into the US nuclear strategy doctrine, etc. Unfortunately, despite Biden's reputation for his stability in nuclear policy/strategy, he deviated from the original track due to the deep-rooted hegemony and eventually evolved into the current vigorous promotion. For example, in the 2023 fiscal year defense budget submitted by Biden's cabinet, the allocation to upgrade the US nuclear arsenal alone is as high as US$34.4 billion, which is a huge difference from the 27.7 billion US dollars in 2022. For example, according to the US Department of Defense, the cost of developing the next-generation intercontinental ballistic missile "sentinel" and maintaining and upgrading existing nuclear facilities will be as high as $100 billion. In short, the current US nuclear policy/strategy is still in an expansion trend. Although it is still under the consistent "strategic ambiguity" overall guidance outline, it has long been known to everyone in Sima Zhao's heart.
(The picture shows the current deployment and quantity of tactical nuclear weapons in the European region. The total number has been reduced to about 100 today compared to 480 in 2000 and 180 in 2010)
After recognizing this hidden danger, NATO member states have had many debates on nuclear policy/strategy. The main topics are focusing on evacuating tactical nuclear weapons deployed by the United States in Europe, adaptive reduction of the scale of nuclear arsenals, abandoning the promise not to use nuclear weapons first, and incorporating preemptive nuclear strike into the above theory, etc. Despite frequent debates, the results achieved are extremely limited, mainly due to strong opposition from the US government.
However, there is another special case in this, that is, France, which has always attached importance to national defense autonomy. Whether it is nuclear policy/strategy or the use of nuclear weapons, the French government keeps a certain distance from the United States. For example, a few days ago, French President Macron stated in an interview with domestic media that if Ukraine suffers a nuclear strike from Russia, the French government will never take reciprocal measures, that is, use nuclear weapons to fight back. This statement made Western media quite annoyed. They accused Macron of undermining the "strategic vague" policy of the Western camp in the use of nuclear weapons and showing their trump card to the Russian government in advance.
(On the opening day of the "First Noon" routine nuclear threat force exercise, the Ukrainian capital Kiev was attacked by the Russian Shahid-136 suicide drone. The picture shows the wreckage of the drone)
Similarly, France will not send its own troops to participate in the "First Noon" routine nuclear deterrence exercise as usual. From this we can see how strong the French government's independence in nuclear policy/strategy and the use of nuclear weapons is. On the other hand, it is precisely because of this that France can avoid being held in a chariot driven by the United States, so that it does not have to worry about large-scale nuclear retaliation initiated by other countries.
Let’s go back to the “firm noon” routine nuclear deterrence exercise. Without the impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war, this exercise will still be as usual, except for triggering wars of words between Russia, the United States, Europe and other parties in the diplomatic field, it will not cause any other waves. But today is different from the past. With the detonation of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the mine is becoming increasingly fierce, which has prompted the NATO organization led by the United States to quickly enter a "quasi-wartime" state. In view of this, this "Final Noon" routine nuclear threat force exercise has a strong targeted meaning.
(Unity is particularly critical to the outside world, but internal discrimination is also worthy of attention. If people's hearts gradually dissipate, then the NATO organization led by the United States may enter the real " brain-death " state)
However, it should be noted that the above military exercises are still more symbolic than substantive. In other words, the nuclear war will not start between Russia and the United States, or in the European zone. After all, representatives of all parties sitting on the card table understand that after pressing the nuclear weapon launch button, it is tantamount to completely leveraging the "Pandora's Box". The consequences are not only unbearable, but also full of variables. At present, NATO's top priority is still to respond to Russian military threats, but at the same time they need to realize that if the internal differences and contradictions are not eliminated as soon as possible in this process, NATO's ability to operate will be greatly offset, which is extremely difficult for the United States to accept!
