The world remains focused on the consequences of US-Israeli warmongering and the continuation of NATO’s ambitions. Within this context, France’s test of a new missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead has revealed another dimension of the West’s nuclear double standards. Emmanuel Macron, speaking aboard the French frigate “Auvergne” following the test, described it as an exceptional action and said: “To be free, one must be fearsome; and to be fearsome, one must be powerful. Our nuclear deterrent safeguards our security and will continue to protect us.” The test and Macron’s remarks carry an important message amid the intensifying global arms and nuclear race. On the one hand, they expose the secret behind the West’s scientific apartheid and its efforts to obstruct scientific achievements, particularly in the nuclear field, by other countries. On the other, they show that being strong in today’s world is not a choice but an unavoidable necessity, particularly as France’s nuclear test and the enormous expenditures of other nuclear-armed states once again expose the ineffectiveness of international institutions in providing meaningful deterrence.
Monopoly on Science; Behind the West’s Nuclear Double Standards
Macron’s remarks that nuclear weapons guarantee France’s security reveal a major secret: the rationale behind scientific apartheid and Western monopolization across various fields, from nuclear and space technology to artificial intelligence and other advanced sciences. On the one hand, this apartheid serves as a means of deterrence and security for countries that possess advanced technologies; on the other, depriving other countries of access to these capabilities can pave the way for the continued dominance of the hegemonic system.
From this perspective, it becomes clear why the West obstructs other countries’ nuclear rights, including those of Iran, refuses to recognize their legitimate right to enrichment, and resorts to every available means, from sanctions to bombing nuclear facilities, in an effort to force Iran into submission and destroy its nuclear capabilities.
The West’s fear of the emergence of nuclear deterrence in other countries can also be seen in Trump’s remarks about North Korea. During a Republican campaign rally in Ohio, Donald Trump, referring to his relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, said: “I have a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un. When a country has 112 nuclear missiles, it’s good to have a good relationship with them.”
Accordingly, possessing the world’s most advanced knowledge across various fields is no longer merely a scientific achievement. It is also a component of national power that can play a decisive role in a country’s security, independence and standing in the world.
Billions of Dollars for a Race That Makes the World Less Secure
The selfish behavior of nuclear-armed states, the consequences of American unilateralism and the ineffectiveness of international institutions have resulted in a significant share of the world’s resources that could have been used to address economic, environmental and humanitarian challenges instead being spent on developing nuclear weapons.
The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons has stated that in 2025, the nine nuclear-armed states collectively spent around $119 billion, equivalent to $3,768 every second, on their nuclear arsenals. According to the report, these countries’ expenditures increased by 19% compared with the previous year. The US, at $69.2 billion, once again spent more than all the other nuclear-armed states combined. China ranked second with $13.5 billion. Britain, with $12.6 billion compared with Russia’s $9.5 billion, overtook Moscow to become the third-highest nuclear spender. France ranked fifth with $7.7 billion, followed by India with $2.8 billion and Pakistan with $1.5 billion. Israel, with $1.2 billion, and North Korea, with $656 million, ranked next.
Although these figures may appear to be nothing more than a collection of numbers, they are in fact signs of the decline of international structures and the intensification of the global arms and nuclear race, a trend that could push other countries toward acquiring nuclear weapons as a component of national security.
The current critical situation is increasing the risk of nuclear war day by day, while the main drivers of this situation are the nuclear-armed states themselves, which, instead of eliminating these weapons, are spending on expanding their arsenals and using nuclear power as an instrument of pressure against other countries.
Ramadan War; When Deterrence Gains Meaning Through National Will
The Ramadan War delivered two important messages to the allies and opponents of American unilateralism. On the one hand, it showed US allies that Washington’s security umbrella is in decline and that the US is effectively an unreliable ally, turning Arab countries into Israel’s first victims. On the other hand, it showed America’s opponents that diplomacy and negotiations, without the backing of power, do not create deterrence and that US domination has no end.
However, the important model provided by the Ramadan War for the world was that countries can challenge and even bring nuclear powers to their knees by localizing security and relying on the components of the battlefield, diplomacy and the people. For this reason, an approach centered on indigenous resistance and the use of geopolitical capabilities can provide a path toward achieving sustainable security. Countries should not be intimidated or forced into submission by the nuclear capabilities of major powers, because their power is neither absolute nor immutable and can be challenged.
France’s Test for IAEA; A Global Responsibility Left Unfulfilled
France’s action and Macron’s meaningful remarks once again raise a question before the world’s public: Where do international institutions, including the International Atomic Energy Agency and its Director General, Rafael Grossi, stand when it comes to international security and the implementation of global rules?
Alongside helping other countries acquire nuclear knowledge, the IAEA’s responsibilities include monitoring the peaceful nature of nuclear activities and moving toward disarmament and the elimination of nuclear weapons. Yet the IAEA has displayed clear double standards, obstructing countries such as Iran from exercising their legitimate nuclear rights on the one hand, while taking no effective action against nuclear-armed states and the expansion of their arsenals on the other.
Today, France has placed the IAEA before a major test, one in which repeating past practices could lead to growing distrust, an increase in countries’ inclination to withdraw from the NPT, and even a move toward developing nuclear bombs. It cannot be expected, under circumstances in which nuclear-armed states continue expanding their arsenals, that other countries’ nuclear doctrines will remain based on staying away from such weapons and that they will refrain from pursuing nuclear weapons as a means of ensuring their own security.
