The candidates, Ukraine and defence: NATO, nuclear deterrent

Since the Russian invasion of 2022, France has supplied Ukraine with weapons, ammunition and military training. The 2024-2030 military programming law, updated by Parliament in July 2026, plans to raise the defence budget every year (vote no. 7905). France, which left NATO's integrated military command in 1966 and rejoined it in 2009, is the only EU country with nuclear weapons. And a new, voluntary military national service was launched in 2026 (CIDJ); compulsory military service has been suspended since 1997.

On these issues the candidates do not line up as they do on the economy: some who disagree on almost everything find common ground here, and vice versa. The test asks about these issues under the topic "Foreign affairs and defence". Five statements are in the main test; one more, on frozen Russian assets, is asked only as a tie-breaker, when the result is close. Below are the positions of all eleven candidates, each based on a programme, a statement or a vote. An asterisk (*) marks an estimated position: the candidate has not addressed the question directly, and the position is inferred from what they have said elsewhere. On this topic 7 of the 66 positions are estimated, 5 of them in the main test (three of David Lisnard's).

The candidates' positions

The tie-break statement is covered further down.

Military aid to Ukraine

"France should continue to give military aid to Ukraine." Six candidates agree, two are neutral and three disagree. Every position has a source.

• Raphaël Glucksmann: his party's programme proposes "drastically increasing" military aid to Ukraine, "our first line of defence" (p. 11).
• Marine Tondelier: the Écologistes' programme seeks to "support Ukraine militarily", "including long-range strike capabilities" (p. 197).
• Gabriel Attal promises to keep supporting Ukraine "relentlessly" ("Borders" workstream).
• Édouard Philippe: "helping Ukraine defend its sovereignty against Russian aggression is helping France's interests" (franceinfo, 8 October 2026).
• David Lisnard argues that France's interest is that Russia does not win, and in 2024 urged ordering ammunition for Ukraine (Nouvelle Énergie).
• Bruno Retailleau devoted his first foreign campaign trip to Ukraine in May 2026, and in 2024 voted in the Senate for the security agreement with Kyiv (op-ed of 14 July 2026).

Two candidates are neutral. Marine Le Pen said in September 2026 that France can no longer help Ukraine financially, while wanting to keep training its soldiers and providing some material aid (Public Sénat, 24 September 2026). Fabien Roussel said in 2024 that "Ukraine must be supported with defensive weapons", without going to war (Sud Radio); his party's 2026 platform calls for the country's neutrality.

Against, Jean-Luc Mélenchon wrote in 2025 that Ukraine "can no longer win", and his programme only plans diplomatic action (blog, August 2025). Éric Zemmour said of aid to Ukraine in September 2026: "It is not on my list now" (BFMTV). Nicolas Dupont-Aignan strongly disagrees: "As president, I will stop all subsidies to Ukraine!" (BFMTV, 21 September 2026).

NATO

"France should leave NATO's integrated military command." Five candidates strongly agree and six disagree. This statement brings together candidates who are far apart on almost everything else.

In favour: Marine Le Pen said in May 2026 that France must leave the integrated military command while remaining in the Alliance (Reuters), as Éric Zemmour's 2022 manifesto proposed (p. 16) and as Nicolas Dupont-Aignan's party proposes, "to rebuild an autonomous national defence" (platform, "Foreign affairs"). Jean-Luc Mélenchon wants to "withdraw immediately from NATO's integrated command and then, step by step, from the organisation itself" (L'Avenir en commun, ch. 16), and Fabien Roussel's party calls for "immediate withdrawal from NATO, a first step towards its dissolution" (p. 8): these two go further than the integrated command alone.

Against: Bruno Retailleau says leaving NATO would be "an unhoped-for gift to our strategic adversaries" and prefers to "Europeanise NATO" (op-ed of 14 July 2026). Édouard Philippe wants Ukraine to join NATO (Reims, 10 May 2026). Ensemble's 2024 programme, a campaign Gabriel Attal led as prime minister, pledged to stay in NATO (p. 11). The Écologistes' programme of Marine Tondelier seeks a European defence independent of the United States, but says "we cannot do without the Atlantic Alliance in the short term" (p. 192). The positions of Raphaël Glucksmann and David Lisnard are estimated: neither has spoken about NATO.

The nuclear deterrent and Europe

"France should offer to extend its nuclear deterrent to its European partners." The decision to use nuclear weapons rests with the President alone; the question is whether they should also protect France's European partners. Four candidates agree and seven disagree.

In favour: Gabriel Attal proposes that France become the new "European nuclear umbrella", with deterrence remaining French (Reims speech, p. 20). Raphaël Glucksmann's party programme proposes extending it to other EU countries, with France keeping the decision to use it (p. 11), and Marine Tondelier's to "consider" such an extension (p. 194). Édouard Philippe's position (agree) is estimated: he calls for "full European sovereignty" in defence, but has not spoken on the deterrent.

Against, four candidates strongly disagree. Bruno Retailleau wrote that the deterrent "is not shared, not negotiated, not extended" (op-ed of 1 March 2026); Nicolas Dupont-Aignan that extending it to neighbours "would be costly and dangerous folly" (2025 op-ed); the European programme of Reconquête, Éric Zemmour's party, rejects "any sharing of France's nuclear deterrent" (p. 9); Fabien Roussel's party opposes "the Europeanisation of the French nuclear force" (p. 8). Two more disagree. Marine Le Pen's 2022 programme wanted a "fully national" deterrent, and the RN's 2024 programme keeps full sovereignty over it (p. 6). In 2024, Jean-Luc Mélenchon's movement called for "keeping the national character of France's nuclear deterrent" (2024 European programme, p. 95). David Lisnard's position (disagree) is estimated.

Compulsory national service

"There should be compulsory national service for all young people." Four candidates agree, three of them strongly, and seven disagree.

In favour: Nicolas Dupont-Aignan's party wants a compulsory three-month civic national service for all 18-year-olds, with a one-year military option (platform, "National defence"); Jean-Luc Mélenchon proposes a nine-month "citizen conscription" for women and men under 25, "paid at the minimum wage" (ch. 5); Raphaël Glucksmann, in his 2026 book, proposes a compulsory ten-month civic service for all young people, with the military part remaining voluntary (LCP, 26 May 2026); Gabriel Attal agrees, with a much shorter duration: one month of compulsory civic service before the age of 25 (Lyon rally, 10 October 2026).

Against, all "disagree", often because they prefer voluntary service. Édouard Philippe wants to expand voluntary military service from 3,000 to 50,000 places a year (priorities, "For a safer France"); Marine Le Pen proposes a voluntary national heritage service (p. 11); Éric Zemmour voluntary military service for 10,000 young people a year (p. 18); Bruno Retailleau a territorial reserve of citizen-soldiers (Public Sénat, 12 October 2026); Marine Tondelier's programme wants more voluntary civic service placements (p. 126); Fabien Roussel's party "rejects the militarisation of young people" (p. 8). David Lisnard's position is estimated.

The defence budget

"France should increase its military spending." This is one of the statements in the test on which the candidates agree most: nine agree, eight of them strongly. Every position has a source.

The eight who strongly agree sometimes give a figure: Bruno Retailleau wants to reach €100 billion by the end of the term (op-ed of 14 July 2026); Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 2.5% of GDP (platform, "National defence"); Éric Zemmour says France disarmed "in a crazily reckless way" (BFMTV). Marine Le Pen voted in July 2026 for the update of the military programming law (vote no. 7905). Gabriel Attal wants to "step up" the rearmament begun in 2017 ("Borders" workstream), Édouard Philippe a new programming law "for massification" (priorities, "For a safer France"), Raphaël Glucksmann to pay the "price" of France's freedom (p. 9) and David Lisnard calls the increase "unavoidable" (RMC, April 2026). Marine Tondelier agrees: in 2025 she shared the goal of raising the defence budget (Public Sénat, 14 March 2025), even though her group voted against the 2026 update.

Two candidates disagree: Jean-Luc Mélenchon's group voted against the update of the military programming law, and his programme wants a different one, focused on industrial sovereignty (vote no. 7905); in October 2026 Fabien Roussel's party proposed to "reject the 7-billion-euro increase in the military budget" (pcf.fr).

Frozen Russian assets (tie-breaker)

"Frozen Russian assets should be seized to fund Ukraine." Five candidates agree: Gabriel Attal (POLITICO, September 2026), Raphaël Glucksmann, whose 2024 European programme proposed seizing "all" of the 206 billion euros of frozen Russian state assets (measure 1), Marine Tondelier (p. 197) Édouard Philippe and Bruno Retailleau, whose groups voted for the Assembly's 2025 resolution on this (vote no. 988); Bruno Retailleau, then Interior Minister, has made no statement of his own. Four are neutral: Marine Le Pen abstained on that resolution; the 2024 New Popular Front programme, signed by the parties of Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Fabien Roussel, only planned to seize oligarchs' assets; David Lisnard's position is estimated. Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, who calls for an end to sanctions on Russia, disagrees; Éric Zemmour's position (disagree) is estimated.

What separates the candidates

The five main-test statements sketch four groups, different from those on the economy.

• Gabriel Attal, Raphaël Glucksmann, Édouard Philippe and Marine Tondelier: help Ukraine, stay in NATO's integrated command, extend the deterrent to Europeans (estimated for Édouard Philippe) and increase military spending.
• Bruno Retailleau and David Lisnard: help Ukraine and increase the defence budget, stay in NATO, but keep a strictly national deterrent (David Lisnard's positions on NATO and the deterrent are estimated).
• Marine Le Pen, Éric Zemmour and Nicolas Dupont-Aignan: leave the integrated command, keep a national deterrent and increase the defence budget; they differ on Ukraine, from neutral (Marine Le Pen) to strongly against (Nicolas Dupont-Aignan).
• Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Fabien Roussel: leave NATO, keep a national deterrent and do not increase military spending. They are the only ones against a bigger budget.

What separates the groups: NATO separates the last two from the first two; a European deterrent separates the first group from all the others; the defence budget separates the last group from all the others.

Who is closest to whom on defence

To compare the candidates two by two, we added up the gaps between their positions on the five main-test statements: aid to Ukraine, NATO, the deterrent, national service and the budget (our calculation). Zero would mean identical positions; the maximum is 20. Here are some pairs, from the closest to the furthest apart. Estimated positions count like the others.

On defence, Gabriel Attal and Raphaël Glucksmann are only one point apart, on national service (Raphaël Glucksmann's position on NATO is estimated), as are Édouard Philippe and Marine Tondelier, on the budget (Édouard Philippe's on the deterrent is estimated), and David Lisnard and Bruno Retailleau, on the deterrent (three of David Lisnard's positions are estimated). National service divides candidates who are close on everything else: it is the only gap of 3 points between Nicolas Dupont-Aignan and Éric Zemmour, between Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Fabien Roussel, and between Raphaël Glucksmann and Marine Tondelier. Marine Le Pen is closer to Jean-Luc Mélenchon (7) than to Gabriel Attal (10): she shares his wish to leave the integrated command and his rejection of a European deterrent, and really differs from him only on national service and the budget. Bruno Retailleau and Éric Zemmour, close on immigration, part ways on NATO. Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Raphaël Glucksmann both strongly support compulsory national service, but are at least three points apart on the other four statements. The furthest apart are Raphaël Glucksmann and Fabien Roussel (16 out of 20), followed by Gabriel Attal and Fabien Roussel (15).

The "Foreign affairs and defence" topic does not count towards the political compass, which uses only the economic and social topics. It does count, like all the others, in your affinity with each candidate.

Further reading

• All the statements on the topic, with sources: "Foreign affairs and defence".
• The candidates' positions on every statement in the test: candidate comparison.
• Compare two candidates, for example Gabriel Attal and Raphaël Glucksmann, Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Raphaël Glucksmann, Raphaël Glucksmann and Fabien Roussel, Bruno Retailleau and Éric Zemmour or Marine Le Pen and Gabriel Attal.
• On the European Union and Ukraine's accession: "The candidates and Europe".
• Candidate pages: Gabriel Attal, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, Raphaël Glucksmann, Marine Le Pen, David Lisnard, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Édouard Philippe, Bruno Retailleau, Fabien Roussel, Marine Tondelier, Éric Zemmour.
• Find out which candidate you are closest to across all topics: take the test.