Europe is ramping up its nuclear defenses, as France expands its arsenal and Poland signals interest in closer nuclear coordination with allies. 

‘I have decided to increase the numbers of warheads of our arsenal,’ French President Emmanuel Macron said Monday. 

He also said France will no longer disclose the size of its nuclear arsenal, reversing previous transparency.

‘To be free, one needs to be feared,’ the French president concluded.

France’s shift comes as Europe faces its most volatile security moment in decades, with Russia’s war in Ukraine grinding on, repeated nuclear threats from Moscow, and renewed questions in European capitals about the long-term reliability of U.S. security guarantees. Recent U.S. military strikes against Iran have added to a sense of global instability.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, meanwhile, signaled his country eventually will try to obtain nuclear weapons. 

‘Poland takes nuclear security very seriously,’ he said Tuesday. ‘As our autonomous capabilities grow, we will strive to prepare Poland for the most autonomous actions possible in this matter in the future.’

Polish President Karol Nawrocki, who frequently finds himself at odds with Tusk, said he is ‘a big supporter of Poland joining the nuclear project.’

Poland is a signatory of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty from the 1960s, meaning it is officially committed not to obtaining nuclear weapons. 

Tusk said Monday that Poland was in talks with France after Macron offered to deploy nuclear-capable fighter jets to allied countries. 

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 shattered long-standing assumptions about conventional deterrence on the continent and has been accompanied by repeated nuclear saber-rattling from Moscow, including threats tied to Western military support for Kyiv. Russian officials have periodically warned of escalation if NATO deepens its involvement, keeping nuclear deterrence at the forefront of European security planning.

At the same time, questions have resurfaced across European capitals about the long-term durability of U.S. security guarantees, even as Washington continues to lead NATO and maintain nuclear forces stationed in Europe under long-standing alliance arrangements.

Several European governments have sharply increased defense spending since the start of the Ukraine war. 

Germany announced a historic military buildup after decades of underinvestment. Poland has become one of NATO’s top defense spenders as a percentage of GDP, rapidly expanding its conventional forces. And leaders in Paris and elsewhere have revived calls for greater ‘strategic autonomy’ — the idea that Europe must be capable of defending itself if the United States shifts its focus elsewhere.

France is the only nuclear-armed nation in the European Union and maintains an independent deterrent separate from NATO’s U.S.-led nuclear umbrella. Any expansion of its arsenal or broader coordination with European partners marks a significant moment in the continent’s post-Cold War security architecture.

Globally, only nine countries are widely believed to possess nuclear weapons: the United States, Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel.

The renewed nuclear focus in Europe is also unfolding as global tensions escalate beyond the continent. The U.S. recently carried out major military strikes against Iran, raising fears of a wider regional conflict and stretching U.S. military attention across multiple theaters.

For some European leaders, the combination of Russia’s aggression and instability in the Middle East reinforces arguments that the continent must be prepared to shoulder more of its own defense burden — including strengthening deterrence at the highest level.

Related Article

World enters uncharted era as US-Russia nuclear treaty expires, opening door to fastest arms race in decades

Iran launched a new wave of attacks on Thursday, with explosions reported in the region and Tehran threatening that the U.S. would ‘bitterly regret’ sinking an Iranian warship.

Iran’s strikes on Thursday targeted Israel, American bases and countries in the region. Israel announced multiple incoming missile attacks as air raid sirens blared in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Defense on Thursday said Iran used unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in an attack on Nakhchivan International Airport and other civilian infrastructure. The ministry said the details of the attack and the capabilities of the UAVs were being investigated.

‘The Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan strongly condemns the attacks carried out by the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran against civilian infrastructure on the territory of Azerbaijan in the absence of any military necessity. The Islamic Republic of Iran bears the entire responsibility for the incident,’ the ministry’s statement read.

Iran has not acknowledged targeting Azerbaijan, despite the country’s ministry of defense pointing the finger at Tehran.

Qatar evacuated residents near the U.S. Embassy in Doha on Thursday, with its Ministry of Defense confirming that the country was ‘subjected to a missile attack’ and that its air defense systems were able to intercept it. The ministry urged the public to remain calm and avoid unofficial information.

Abu Dhabi announced that its authorities were responding to an incident involving falling debris in ICAD 2, which is part of the Industrial City of Abu Dhabi. Six people, identified by Abu Dhabi as Pakistani and Nepali nationals, suffered minor to moderate injuries.

Iran has carried out retaliatory strikes since the launch of Operation Epic Fury, with the latest wave coming one day after the U.S. sunk an Iranian warship, killing at least 87 Iranian sailors. Sri Lankan navy spokesman Cmdr. Buddhika Sampath said 32 people were rescued from the wreck and were admitted to a hospital.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth defended the move during a news briefing at the Pentagon.

‘An American submarine sunk an Iranian warship that thought it was safe in international waters. Instead, it was sunk by a torpedo — Quiet Death. The first sinking of an enemy ship by a torpedo since World War II. Like in that war, back when we were still the War Department, we are fighting to win,’ Hegseth said.

Iranian leaders condemned the attack, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi accusing the U.S. Navy of committing ‘an atrocity at sea.’ Meanwhile, Ayatollah Abdollah Javadi Amoli appeared on state television and called for the shedding of Israeli and ‘Trump’s blood.’

‘Fight the oppressive America, his blood is on my shoulders,’ he said in a rare call for violence from an ayatollah, one of the highest ranks within the clergy of Shiite Islam.

The U.S. and Israel launched the war on Saturday with strikes targeting Iran’s leadership, including the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed. Iran’s missile arsenal and nuclear facilities were also hit.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Related Article

Israel hammers Iranian internal security command centers to open door to uprising

I spent decades inside the Pentagon watching technology reshape warfare. I saw precision munitions change the battlefield. I watched satellites compress decision cycles. But nothing compares to what is happening now.

Artificial intelligence has moved the lab to the kill chain.

And the showdown between Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and AI firm Anthropic is not a contract dispute. It is the opening battle over who controls the most powerful military technology of the 21st century.

AI is already transforming war

Look at Ukraine.

Western officials report that drones now account for roughly 70-80% of battlefield casualties in that war. But the real revolution occurs when AI is added. Reports indicate AI-guided navigation can increase drone strike accuracy from 10–20% to as high as 70–80%.

That is not incremental change. That is a transformation in battlefield lethality.

The same dynamic is emerging in U.S. operations involving Iran and other theaters. AI tools are being used for intelligence analysis, targeting refinement, pattern recognition, and operational simulations. These systems compress time, reduce uncertainty and accelerate decisions.

AI is not theoretical. It is operational.

Which brings us to Washington.

What the Hegseth–Anthropic standoff is really about

On Feb. 27, Hegseth designated Anthropic a ‘supply chain risk to national security.’ President Donald Trump ordered federal agencies to cease using its Claude AI model after Anthropic refused to remove two guardrails:

A prohibition on fully autonomous weapons.

A prohibition on mass domestic surveillance.

Artificial intelligence has moved the lab to the kill chain.

The Pentagon argues that military commanders must be able to use AI tools for all lawful defense purposes without seeking permission from a private company in real time.

Anthropic argues that removing safeguards could enable autonomous killing systems or unconstitutional domestic spying.

Both concerns are legitimate.

But here is the deeper problem: America has outsourced strategic control of its most sensitive military algorithms to private contractors.

That is unsustainable.

Draw the right line

Let me be clear about what must not happen.

We must not expand domestic surveillance of American citizens under the banner of AI efficiency. The Fourth Amendment does not disappear in the age of algorithms.

Second, we must keep a human being in the kill chain. I served under lawful command authority. Life-and-death decisions carry moral accountability. They cannot be delegated entirely to autonomous systems.

Those are firm boundaries.

But here is the other boundary: no private corporation should hold an effective veto over how America defends itself.

Washington’s contractor addiction

For decades, the federal government has grown dependent on contractors for critical defense functions — logistics, cyber infrastructure, analytics and intelligence support. AI is simply the next frontier in that pattern.

But frontier AI models are not spare parts or uniforms. They are strategic infrastructure. They influence targeting, operational tempo and potentially deterrence modeling.

That level of sensitivity cannot remain under corporate ownership.

During World War II, the United States built the atomic bomb through the Manhattan Project under centralized national authority. It was not governed by venture-backed boards setting independent usage policies. It was directed by the U.S. government with a clear strategic mandate.

We need a similar mindset for our most sensitive AI systems.

Government must own core military algorithms. Not lease them. Not subscribe to them. Own them.

AI tools are being used for intelligence analysis, targeting refinement, pattern recognition, and operational simulations. These systems compress time, reduce uncertainty and accelerate decisions.

If AI is the new strategic high ground, America cannot subcontract the high ground.

China isn’t hesitating

As I argue in ‘The New AI Cold War,’ Beijing does not struggle with these dilemmas.

China fuses AI development directly to the state. There are no Silicon Valley executives in Beijing refusing military access. AI is treated as national infrastructure.

Russia and other nations are moving in similar directions. They are not debating internal guardrails while field-testing AI-enabled systems.

Strategic competition does not pause while we litigate contract language.

What must happen next

First, Congress must draw bright lines: no AI-enabled mass domestic surveillance of Americans without strict constitutional safeguards.

Second, codify meaningful human control over lethal force decisions.

Third — and most critically — build sovereign AI capacity inside government.

That means:

• Government-controlled AI research for classified applications
• Government ownership of core defense algorithms
• Reduced reliance on private frontier labs for sensitive military systems
• Long-term pipelines of cleared AI engineers

Anthropic argues that removing safeguards could enable autonomous killing systems or unconstitutional domestic spying.

Private industry will continue to innovate. But America’s most sensitive warfighting tools cannot remain dependent on companies whose corporate policies can override national defense requirements.

The real issue is sovereignty

The Pentagon–Anthropic feud is not about personalities. It is about sovereignty.

Who controls the algorithms that guide American force?

Who owns the code?

Who decides how it is used?

In the new AI Cold War, power will belong to those who control the models — not merely those who rent access to them.

America must protect liberty. We must reject AI-driven domestic surveillance. We must preserve human moral accountability in the use of force.

First, Congress must draw bright lines: no AI-enabled mass domestic surveillance of Americans without strict constitutional safeguards.

But we must also end the illusion that venture-backed firms can function as ultimate gatekeepers of national defense.

The AI Cold War is not hypothetical. It is unfolding on battlefields abroad and in policy fights at home.

This moment is not about one company. It is about whether the United States will treat artificial intelligence as strategic national infrastructure — or as a contractor service.

The answer will shape the next generation of warfare.

And history will not wait for us to decide.

Related Article

Trump admin sought redactions on key China war game report warning of US military readiness gaps

The highest-ranking Minnesotan in Congress is calling for a deeper investigation into allegations that leaders in his state government knowingly ignored evidence of welfare fraud, and he called for those leaders to even face incarceration if proven true.

‘People are sick and tired of elected officials having a double standard, being treated differently than they are. They’re held accountable for things that they should be held accountable for, when their elected officials are not,’ House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., told Fox News Digital. 

‘If these two guys are dirty, they should be held accountable, and they should serve jail time.’

He was referring to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and state Attorney General Keith Ellison, two of several witnesses at a high-profile hearing on fraud conducted by the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday.

Both Walz and Ellison insisted that they were serious about prosecuting fraud in the state’s social programs and that they took action to stop it once it was brought to their attention.

But Emmer cited a report by the House Oversight Committee that accused them both of knowing about the fraud earlier than previously thought and delaying public accountability for fear of political retribution from progressives in the state — particularly the Somali community in Minneapolis, who Republicans have accused of taking advantage of the state’s welfare system.

‘They might have been able to qualify it enough that it wasn’t black and white, but if they lied to the committee this morning about knowing about the fraud and when they knew about the fraud and the FBI investigation, that is a criminal act of its own,’ Emmer told Fox News Digital.

‘So I do believe, depending on this report and what else the majority staff is doing, they very well may want to call them back in and depose them under oath.’

He added at another point, ‘You have maybe 80 to 100,000 Somalis in Minnesota. Tim Walz won with 52%. They made a difference. Keith Ellison won by less than 1%. I think it was 20,000 votes. Makes a difference. So if those are connected, yeah, I mean, this is campaign fraud.’

‘I’ve taken accountability for this. I’m not going to run again. I need to spend the time fixing this,’ Walz said during the hearing. ‘This does undermine trust in government. Do I wish there were things that could have happened earlier? Yes. But in this job, ‘wish’ didn’t do it. I’m looking into where I see it.’

At another point, Walz attributed the rise in fraud statistics to an increase in prosecutions, telling Republicans, ‘When you catch people and prosecute them, it shows up as a fraud increase.’

He also dismissed accusations that he kept whistle-blowers quiet over fear of being seen as Islamophobic, ‘I can’t speak to it because it’s not anything I would say.’

Ellison, meanwhile, said he was happy to work across bipartisan lines to prosecute fraud.

‘I am here to work to improve this system, and there are improvements that can be made,’ he said. ‘If we can get out of fixing the blame and get to fixing the problem, that would be an enormous thing for me.’

But Emmer, who maintained that further investigation was needed, suggested he doubted their intentions.

‘It’s power. They want power. In order for them to get power, they need to be elected. In order for them to get elected, they have to cheat in different ways. And that is exactly what they did,’ Emmer said. ‘If the Somali community is being used by these public officials to get themselves into office…it sure does look suspect, it needs to be investigated.’

Related Article

GREGG JARRETT: If Walz is charged in Minnesota fraud scandal, his best defense is incompetence