Speech by Laëtitia PLANCHE at the NATO in Crisis: Time to Overcome the War Machine  Pre-Summit | July 3, 2026 

Greetings to all pacifists,

And thanks for your invitation,

Much has already been said regarding the general situation. I will therefore focus more directly on the situation in France.

Amidst the process of realignment, Germany is amassing economic, financial, and military capabilities and seeking to impose its approach by becoming “the leading conventional army and the European pillar of NATO,” according to the German Defense Minister. In response, France is attempting to counter Germany by pursuing a dangerous policy of escalation, with a view toward confrontation with Russia. It is using the threat of war to regain leverage within the European Union’s internal power dynamics—effectively accepting the shift of the war burden from the USA to Europe.

The French President’s speech on July 13, 2025, confirm the subordination of France’s defense policy to the dictates of Donald Trump—formalized at the NATO summit in The Hague—as well as to the interests of shareholders in the arms industry.

As an example—while remaining a model NATO student yet attempting a balancing act by simultaneously advocating for European sovereignty—France faces a challenge regarding a specific project that the United States has decided to block within the Alliance’s Military Committee. Washington aims to cut the number of “Centres of Excellence” from thirty down to just five—one for each domain (air, land, sea, space, and cyber)—as part of the “NATO 3.0” initiative. Paris is currently fighting within NATO to defend its planned French center for artificial intelligence, to be based in Rennes, which already hosts the Cyber Defense Command. This project was launched at the Emmanuel Macron’s Summit on Artificial Intelligence Action in February 2025.

French military policy is characterized by:

– An all-professional military combined with voluntary military service.

– A new theory of “forward” nuclear deterrence aimed at nine European countries (Germany, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway), involving an increase in the number of nuclear warheads—the total count of which will no longer be made public. These decisions run entirely counter to France’s commitments under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This “Europeanization” of forward deterrence, the closer alignment with the British nuclear posture (the Northwood Agreement)—which is dependent on the United States—and the creation of a Franco-German nuclear steering group pose a threat to all European peoples.

– A 2024–2030 Military Programming Law involving exponential spending increases: the budget rises from the previous €295 billion to €413 billion over seven years—a 40% increase. Additionally, a supplementary allocation of €36 billion is under discussion in the National Assembly, with the Senate pushing for as much as €50 billion. This supplementary funding measure was passed on July 1st by an overwhelming majority of lawmakers, except for the deputies from the radical left, the Communists, and the Greens.-

The establishment, within the framework of this Military Programming Law, of a “national security alert state” that can be triggered by a simple decree on grounds of “internal security.”

– And the facilitation of the use of private military companies.

Government communications—along with all its media and economic mouthpieces—are being mobilized to gain acceptance for this policy and the new sacrifices demanded of the population regarding public services, and indeed beyond. Their aim is to cast Russia as the enemy. For instance, General Mandon spoke at the Mayors’ Congress in November 2025; his speech is highly emblematic of the mindset currently being fostered in France. It was the first time a general had spoken in such a context. He identified Russia as the primary military risk factor for European security. He noted that a power’s strength does not rely solely on its military; according to him, a strong nation rests on three pillars:

– effective armed forces

– an economy capable of sustaining a prolonged effort

– a population psychologically prepared for hardship.

The term “resilience” comes up constantly. One sentence in the speech particularly shocked public opinion: “We must accept the loss of our children and economic suffering. If we are not prepared for that, then we are at risk.”

As part of this same effort to prepare the population for war, the “Blanchet” bill of January 2026 aims to foster a genuine defense culture among young people. Thirty-five minutes per week of class time would be dedicated to this for all students from *6ème* to *terminale* (ages 11 to 17), comprising a “citizenship pathway” and actual military-related knowledge.

The security of peoples is only guaranteed if the security of neighboring peoples is also assured. Security is, therefore, a shared and collective matter.

This underscores the urgent need to initiate a “Europe of chosen geometry,” wherein necessary European cooperation is built upon the interests of the people. This offers a way to challenge existing European treaties and break with their liberal and Atlanticist logic.

To this end, it is also time for France to withdraw from NATO and orchestrate its dissolution.

France has the capacity to prepare for a short-term withdrawal from the integrated military command structure, as was the case between 1966 and 2009. Today, Trump’s stance regarding a US disengagement from Europe offers an opportunity to reopen the debate.

France possesses the necessary capabilities: there have been no US troops stationed in France since 1966, its nuclear deterrent is entirely independent, and it maintains its own military intelligence agency (the DRM), established in 1992 following the first Gulf War.

Preparing for a complete exit from NATO—that is, from the Atlantic Alliance—entails:

– Military preparation and the establishment of European cooperative frameworks

– Political preparation, specifically the creation of a European collective security zone

– The development of an independent defense industrial and technological base.

The withdrawal from and dissolution of NATO is therefore being considered:

– Initially and immediately, through withdrawal from NATO’s integrated command and the denunciation of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

– Simultaneously, through an appeal to European countries for the reconstruction of a pan-European system of collective security. The debate on NATO exists in several European countries (Spain, Slovenia). Other countries are neutral (Austria, Ireland, Cyprus, and Malta). These are points of leverage for working towards the withdrawal from and dissolution of NATO.