Archive: https://archive.is/2025.03.18-050128/https://www.ft.com/content/7fed8f2b-98c7-43c6-88b3-d66be449bfac

Macron has repeatedly stressed that a French president would always have ultimate power to decide whether to use the bomb — the same applies to Britain and the US within Nato.

Together, British and French nuclear capabilities would at least make Moscow think twice about attacking, said a senior western official.

However, “what really influences Russian decision-making is the scale of US deterrence”, he said. Europe would need at least a decade of spending at around 6-7 per cent of GDP if it wanted to emulate that and acquire another 1,000 warheads, he added.

  • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 hours ago

    … does the Russian civilian population have any influence on Russian decision-making? Is there any point in running expensive PR-campaigns against them?

    Never forget Stanislav Petrov. In the end it’s a human that needs to press the button, at least for now.

    • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 hours ago

      There is a French movie about a similar situation : The Wolf’s Call.

      the French military command detects a nuclear missile sent from Russia towards France, they send the order to retaliate to their submarine but … (I am trying not to spoil the whole movie, people should watch it. Even though it’s from 2019 it is very fitting with what is happening now)

    • splendoruranium@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Never forget Stanislav Petrov. In the end it’s a human that needs to press the button, at least for now.

      Fair (with a special ominous shoutout to your “at least for now”), but do you think Petrov’s or any similar individual person’s decision making in this scenario would involve any considerations regarding the size launching nation’s or block’s arsenal? I.e. “Launch detected from US… hm, better play it safe. Launch detected from France… eh, hit that button!”?
      I mean… nuclear threat is nuclear threat. I am not questioning the effectiveness of that threat, I’m questioning the premise of the article.

      • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        When evaluating Mutually Assured Destruction scenarios military must consider backup plan for what happens after we bomb ourselves back to Stone Age. Russia has much more capability to carry on due to size, low population density and being used to things being awful all around. They’re mad but they are also cold calculating bastards that they are probably estimating chances of Syberia / Arctic being habitable after bombs and global warming.

        „What is the point of the world without Russia in it?” - Putin bluffed some time ago.

          • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Full scale one would bring death and destruction to the whole world one way or another. But a limited one with UK/France? 🤷‍♂️