Well that's top grade stupidity isn't it. Something like that should've been held very close by Belgium and NATO. Even Edmund Blackadder would be flummoxed by that level of stupidity.
European and US views on their future relations with Russia and China are very different. Point in case, a few years back France almost sold an advanced command and control system, together with the Mistrals, to Russia. While the US views China as a likely opponent in the Pacific, it's not clear that the European NATO members do.
What I'm getting at is that the French were willing to sell the SENIT-9 with the Mistrals, which is itself based on a similar US system. And the French wanted to continue the sale despite Russian "excursions". Only significant international pressure forced them to abandon the deal. China would have to do some serious escalating for the Europeans to get as worried about it as they were about the potential for a war in 2014.
Or Quebec compared with the other Provinces
I think that if the Europeans are serious about taking charge of NATO, they need to decide on whether they want a Euro-centric NATO or an EU armed forces, and what role the structures in question would serve. The old mantra of America in, Germany down, and Russia out, clearly doesn't apply in a situation where Germany is a leading European nation and the US is the one being distanced. Not to mention that the Europeans seem to have far less of a problem with Russia than the US. I think the Europeans need to think long and hard about what kind of international military arrangement they want and what ends it ought to serve.
I agree, and they do need to start having that discussion now. I think that NATO does need to be more Eurocentric and that an EU armed forces and NATO as separate organisations / structures would be a waste of resources and capital, both political and financial. What ever the Euros decide to do, it should be based around a troika of British (well maybe English nuclear capabilities after the Brexit mess), French & German military capabilities. Yes, Europe doesn't appear to have the same anti-Russian phobia that the US has, however it should still be very wary of the Russian bear, especially after the 1994 invasion and subjugation of Chechnya, 2008 Ossettia incursions, 2014 Crimean annexation, and the 2014 Ukrainian incursions.
I can't help but wonder about the reliability of Britain/Walesgland in the future. They clearly feel closer to the US then to their European counterparts. Maybe a European Council of France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and Poland would make a better core for the new alliance? Poland has a large military and is building some serious capabilities. It would also send an important political message that an Eastern European country is included in this manner.
There is that, but I included England & Wales because of their nuclear component. If / when the Scots withdraw from the UK, from what I've read so far, nothing suggests that they want any of the nuclear weapons systems. From what I understand the SNP per se, would be more than happy to see the nuke weapons and subs head south of the border. Walesgland,* as you call it, would bring a sizeable nuclear weapons component to any Euro force, probably doubling it when added to the French component.
If we're in a world where the EU and NATO and their collective states get over their bickering and bureaucratic inertia to seriously overhaul the EU/NATO armed forces into a new structure with clear goals and a Euro-centric leadership, then I don't see any reason why they can't pool their money for a bigger "French" nuclear stockpile, or simply petition the UN Security Council for a nuclear privilege for either the organization as a whole or for some of it's other members (Germany for example). Hell they can even go full Iran and amend, suspend, or withdraw their participation in NPT. Who's going to stop them? The US? I doubt it, they are still allies in principle, and the US is telling them to take on their own defense responsibilities. Russia and China? I suspect they would be more than open to a deal of some sort (recognize Crimean annexation, and pull the plug on financial aid to Ukraine for example, and I bet Russia would happily let the Germans build nukes).There is that, but I included England & Wales because of their nuclear component. If / when the Scots withdraw from the UK, from what I've read so far, nothing suggests that they want any of the nuclear weapons systems. From what I understand the SNP per se, would be more than happy to see the nuke weapons and subs head south of the border. Walesgland,* as you call it, would bring a sizeable nuclear weapons component to any Euro force, probably doubling it when added to the French component.
* The Taffies (Welsh) in the valleys will just love that. I can just hear them bursting into Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau (Land Of My Fathers) and Rhyfelgyrch Gwŷr Harlech (Men Of Harlech) around the valleys and in the pubs.
The option has been discussed in Germany relatively recently. There's a 2017 paper (in German) from the Scientific Service of the German Parliament elaborating on legal requirements regarding the NPT, the 2+4 Treaty and the then-under-draft UN TPNW which we haven't signed since (the only EU member that has done so is Ireland).
Germany has an officially stated policy of participating in nuclear sharing concepts and remaining part of nuclear strategic planning. This policy is both stated in the Whitebook of the German Military laying out long-term strategic planning and reaffirmed in the current government coalition treaty.