Media reports said as much as $700 billion could be allocated to Europe's defenses, though it was not clear how much of that amount would go to Kyiv.

Summary

European officials are preparing a multibillion-dollar defense package to bolster regional security and support Ukraine, announced by German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock at the Munich Security Conference.

The package, potentially valued up to 700 billion euros, will fund military training, arms deliveries, and security guarantees amid concerns over Russian aggression and diminishing U.S. contributions to NATO.

The move follows calls for Europe to boost its own defense spending while U.S.-Russian talks, which exclude Ukraine and Europe, on ending the Ukraine conflict continue.

  • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    3·
    2 days ago

    One won’t be enough. If they use it, Russia will at least hit the whole frontline with tactical nukes, maybe wipe out a city or two. That means Ukraine can’t use it, making it as valuable as a paperweight. For credible nuclear deterrence a country needs a few dozen nuclear weapons and more than one delivery method.

    • NotLemming@lemm.eeEnglish
      7·
      2 days ago

      Noone who has nukes can use them, but that’s not the point. Just the threat is enough. One nuke with enough juice to get it to Moscow would be enough. I’m pretty sure if any country ever used a nuke, the whole world would explode.

      • bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        11 hours ago

        The threat needs to be credible though. One bomb is not enough because it could be destroyed in a first strike without fear of a second strike.

        One bomb won’t make it to Moscow. Air defense will take down a single attacking missile or plane.

      • SpaceCowboyEnglish
        3·
        2 days ago

        There are air defenses that could potentially shoot down a missile before it hits its target. So one means there’s merely a probability of destroying Moscow. A psychopath like Putin may be willing to take that risk, and even if Moscow got nuked, Russia would still exist (though obviously it would be significantly diminished), and he’d have justification for using nukes on Ukraine.

        For MAD to apply you need enough nukes to be an existential threat to another country when you’re dealing with psychopaths that would be fine with potentially millions of people dying if it means they come out on top in a war.

        • NotLemming@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          2 days ago

          I think he’d be smart enough to not want to take the risk of destroying so much. Yeah he’s a psychopath but who would gamble with that kind of destruction… I guess if the nuke failed to explode that’s another consideration but I’d assumed even if the air defences worked in any sense, the nuke would still detonate? If that happened in the air, wouldn’t it kill/maim a lot of people and taint land with the radioactivity?

          What worries me is that the UK nukes are (I think) unable to be used without US authority so at the moment they’re essentially useless even as a deterrent. I saw Kier Starmer giving that speech recently and yep, we’re in trouble lol, he’s no good at hiding his feelings. I almost feel sorry for him, except that I remember what he did to become the labour leader.