No final decision has been made, the sources stressed. The discussions reflect deepening concern in Washington and among eastern allies about Russia’s military ambitions and its recent stationing of tactical nuclear arms in Belarus.
The review focuses on the possible stationing of F-35A fighter jets and other dual-capable aircraft able to carry B61-12 gravity bombs. Poland has been the most vocal advocate for hosting such weapons under NATO’s nuclear sharing program. President Andrzej Duda stated publicly last year that his country was ready to accept the mission. Officials in Warsaw have continued to press the case in private talks with US and NATO counterparts, two European diplomats said.
The United States already stores an estimated 100 B61 bombs at six air bases in five allied nations: Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey. Those arrangements date to the Cold War and are designed to reassure partners and deter attack. Extending the posture to NATO’s eastern flank would give frontline states a direct stake in the nuclear mission and, planners argue, strengthen the alliance’s overall deterrence.
A senior NATO official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said allied military planners have updated readiness assessments that include new basing options. “The discussions are real but they remain preliminary,” the official said. “No political decision has been taken by NATO or the United States.” A US defense official confirmed that the Pentagon’s strategic reviews have weighed the risks and benefits of an expanded nuclear sharing arrangement. The work is part of a broader effort to adjust force posture in response to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and Moscow’s repeated nuclear threats.
Russia’s deployment of tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus, which borders Poland and the Baltic states, has sharpened the debate. Eastern allies have argued that extending US nuclear weapons deployment to their soil would restore balance and signal collective resolve. Warsaw has made clear that it views hosting the mission as a concrete guarantee.
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov warned that any forward stationing of US nuclear assets would be seen as a direct threat. Moscow would adopt the necessary countermeasures to protect its own security, Peskov said. Russia has long portrayed NATO’s nuclear sharing as a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The alliance rejects that characterization and notes that the weapons stay under full US control.
Independent analysts caution that building a new nuclear storage site would take several years and require significant funding. The Federation of American Scientists estimated in a recent report that a secure vault and support facility in Poland could cost between $100 million and $300 million. Trained personnel and upgraded infrastructure would also be needed. The analysts said no construction had begun, but the planning work signaled a serious evaluation.
Political hurdles remain. The 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act declared that the alliance had “no intention, no plan and no reason” to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members. NATO officials now say that Russia’s aggression has fundamentally changed the security environment and that the document no longer constrains planning. Some allied capitals, however, worry that moving nuclear-capable aircraft eastward could fuel instability.
A spokesperson for the White House National Security Council said the United States remains committed to the security of all NATO allies and regularly reviews force posture. The spokesperson declined to comment on any specific deployment options.
The broader nuclear sharing framework is already being modernized. Older B61 bombs are being replaced with the B61-12 variant, which offers improved accuracy and a lower-yield option. The primary delivery aircraft are US F-35A jets, along with some European Tornado aircraft that are scheduled for retirement.
No public timeline has been set for a decision. Diplomats expect the topic to be discussed at NATO defense ministerial meetings in the months ahead. Any move would require consensus among all 32 allies.