I do see how this might be a conflict, thank you for pointing it out. In general I’m not convinced that those competitors couldn't just leave and use some other instruction set. If ARM is too important to business to be owned by a selfish company, then declare it public domain already…
I don't know how accurate that website is. For France, it lists the following:
> Don’t Bank on the bomb identifies the following companies as producers of key components for the French nuclear weapons arsenal:
> Airbus Group (the Netherlands),
> BAE Systems (United Kingdom),
> Leonardo (Italy),
> Safran (France), and
> Thales (France)
(Neither of which has anything to do with nukes directly)
Which isn't incorrect but misleading. There are two French nuclear-capable missiles (ASMPA and M51, for air and submarine launches respectively) and one warhead ( TNA). ASMPA is a cruise missile designed by MBDA (which is the successor to government-owned missile companies), M51 was mostly designed by the military with some parts subcontracted to various subcontractors like MBDA, Safran, Thales, etc.
However, the nuclear warheads themselves are designed by a government-owned company, CEA, and everything nuclear related in France is at least majority government owned.
I don't feel it's misleading; a nuclear weapon is much more than the warhead.
Nuclear weapon delivery systems have been the most important part even since the first ever atomic bomb. The B-29 Superfortress that dropped the bombs on Japan cost about 1.5x as much as the Manhattan Project to develop[1].
Every discussion of arsenals I've seen focuses on delivery more than warheads [2][3].
Additionally, I can't speak for France, but in the US, the warheads are produced/refurbished in government-owned, privately managed and operated facilities. That's to say, the likes of Lockheed-Martin, Northtrop Grumman and Honeywell have all the operational knowledge and access, but technically Pantex is government-owned.
