Bloomberg: Germany rethinks nuclear power and security

Bloomberg’s recent opinion piece spotlights a seismic shift in German thinking about nuclear technology, both military and civilian, against the backdrop of Europe’s uncertain security landscape. The debate has been reignited by a combination of geopolitical stress, energy vulnerability, and shifting transatlantic dynamics, notably after US Vice President JD Vance’s 2025 Munich Security Conference speech warning of Europe’s “threat from within.” Germany, long pacifist and legally constrained in nuclear matters, now finds itself reassessing its relationship with atomic power.

Historically, Germany has relied on NATO for its nuclear deterrence, with American nuclear bombs stationed on German soil under the alliance’s sharing arrangement. Yet the opinion piece highlights that German policymakers, military figures, and even former pacifists are questioning whether this is sufficient. Bundeswehr Brigadier General Frank Pieper’s call for tactical nuclear weapons, coupled with historian Harald Biermann and former Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer’s support for European nuclear capabilities, signals a major ideological shift—even within the traditionally anti-nuclear Green Party. Bloomberg underscores that while a German bomb is unlikely due to legal and strategic hurdles, the discussion itself reflects a broader reckoning with Germany’s role in European security.

The piece stresses that Germany’s security challenges are compounded by energy dependence. The 2023 closure of its last nuclear reactors left the country heavily reliant on imported energy, including US liquefied natural gas and Russian pipelines before the war-driven supply crisis. Bloomberg uses the concept of “Dunkelflaute”—periods of windless, cloudy weather that constrain renewable output—to illustrate Germany’s vulnerability. The author argues that energy self-sufficiency is as vital to national power as military deterrence. Without it, Germany risks strategic exposure, particularly in a Europe now reconsidering its autonomy from US guarantees and Russian influence.

Bloomberg frames these dual challenges—military and energy—under a common lens: the need for strategic independence. Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s admission that Germany’s nuclear exit was a “bad strategic mistake” epitomises this sentiment. The opinion piece stresses that even without building nuclear weapons, Germany can contribute to European security through conventional military strength, collaboration with France and the UK, and a reevaluation of civilian nuclear energy. Nuclear technology, the article argues, should not be viewed purely as a weapon, but as a cornerstone of economic and geopolitical stability.

Importantly, Bloomberg contextualises the debate culturally and historically. Germany’s Cold War experience, hosting nuclear weapons while split between East and West, created a national psyche sceptical of atomic arms. Yet the piece asserts that today’s Germany—united, economically dominant, and facing a Europe in flux—cannot afford such reticence. The author contends that strategic maturity demands revisiting past decisions, including both the nuclear exit and military reliance on allies.

Ultimately, the Bloomberg opinion argues for a pragmatic recalibration. A German bomb may be unrealistic, but renewed engagement with nuclear energy and deeper European defence collaboration are actionable paths forward. The piece challenges Germany to reconcile its pacifist traditions with contemporary imperatives, suggesting that mastering nuclear policy—military or civilian—is a litmus test of Europe’s ability to assert independence and maintain security in a turbulent geopolitical era.

By Vugar Khalilov