"Could bring the system crashing down" Is Trump now triggering the global nuclear arms race?

If the USA under Donald Trump no longer takes the security of its allies so seriously, they could look to other means to deter opponents: experts warn of new nuclear armaments.

Pax Americana is over, many observers fear. The strong man in the White House is breaking up international relations: The USA votes against a resolution at the UN calling on Russia to withdraw from Ukraine as the aggressor. Together with North Korea and Belarus. Donald Trump redefines US foreign policy.

The new course and the new administration's explicit lack of interest in the war in Ukraine raise the question of whether Uncle Sam would come to Europe's aid if a NATO partner were to be attacked in the Baltic states, for example: How else would a Vladimir Putin be deterred from preparing the next round of hostilities after a possible peace agreement?

What would happen if Trump withdrew US troops from Europe? A country like Germany would then lose its "nuclear sharing": The concept states that Nato states with nuclear weapons extend their protective umbrella over those Nato countries without nuclear weapons. Paris has recognized the problem: It is offering Berlin to station French nuclear weapons in Germany.

France offers Germany nuclear jets

The British "Telegraph" reports: "Stationing a few French nuclear jets in Germany should not be difficult and would send a strong message," a high-ranking official is quoted as saying. The newspaper speculates that Emmanuel Macron's move is intended to persuade British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to do the same.

An extension of the British and French nuclear umbrella would probably go down well with Germany's next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, who spoke out after his election in favor of making his country less dependent on the USA. On the other hand, Germany is not the only EU state that fears Russia.

If the USA fails to act as NATO's reinsurance, Poland or Sweden could also consider acquiring nuclear weapons. This is also shown by the example of Ukraine, which gave up its nuclear arsenal after the collapse of the Soviet Union - because Russia, among others, guaranteed peace and stable borders.

Trump recommends nuclear weapons to South Korea and Japan in 2016

The Europeans at least have London and Paris, which can theoretically stand by their side. The USA's Asian allies have no alternative to Trump: in Japan and South Korea, the issue of nuclear weapons will soon be back on the agenda. Why again? It was the same before Trump's first term in office.

When the Republican was fighting for his party's nomination in 2016, he talked about the USA spending too much money to protect others. "You've got so many countries - China, Pakistan. You have so many countries - Russia. You have so many countries now that they already have," "CBS News" quoted him as saying at the time. "Wouldn't you rather Japan have nuclear weapons if North Korea [also] has nuclear weapons?"

Tokyo, but also Seoul, would have to build up their own arsenal, the New Yorker said nine years ago. And now Japan and South Korea have to watch as Trump wants to issue Volodymyr Zelensky with a hefty bill - for the Ukraine aid that has been provided to date. Who will tell the Asians that the White House won't come knocking on their door to get more for the US bases in their countries? Or refuses to help in the event of a conflict?

Criticism of Trump's "disastrous message"

"More countries could get nuclear weapons under Trump", warned Bloomberg at the beginning of January in anticipation of the new US foreign policy and the collapse of the "nuclear umbrella ". Sowing doubt about Uncle Sam's resolve is a "disastrous message"

The conservative Telegraph knows that the nuclear arsenal devours 50 billion dollars a year. Trump wants to reduce these costs, which explains his idea of holding new disarmament talks with Russia and China. However, Beijing is currently secretly expanding its nuclear forces, warns the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

Trump's policy "could undermine the best mechanism the world has to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons", warns Just Security, a project of the New York University School of Law. It is no coincidence that many states have the technology but have not developed their own nuclear forces.

"Trump could bring this system down"

The successful prevention of proliferation is due to a bipartisan consensus in US policy, which prevented Taiwan, for example, from producing nuclear weapons in the 70s and 80s. The fact that Ukraine dismantled its arsenal in the 1990s is also thanks to the cooperation of Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Bill Clinton.

They are talking about war3 gloomy predictions for the future of NATO and the West

Trump does not believe in this concept, but is flirting with a withdrawal from NATO. "Rightly or wrongly: rightly or wrongly, countries will come to the conclusion that they need their own nuclear deterrent," warns Just Security. In the Middle East, this could even lead to a nuclear arms race between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

US presidents of both parties have "built a mostly effective - but always fragile - international system to contain the world's most powerful weapons", the analysis concludes. Trump's alliance skepticism could collapse that system. "Trump's alliance skepticism could collapse that system."