New START Treaty Expiry Avoids Immediate Nuclear Arms Race, Experts Claim
The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, widely known as New START, officially expired on Thursday, dismantling a crucial guardrail that had prevented the United States and Russia from expanding their nuclear arsenals. This landmark agreement, originally signed in 2010, required both nations to limit their deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550 and restrict missile and bomber delivery systems to 700. Together, these rival powers control approximately 85 percent of the world's strategic nuclear weapons, raising fears that the treaty's end could trigger an unconstrained arms race reminiscent of the Cold War era.
Potential Global Implications and Escalating Tensions
The expiration arrives at a precarious moment, with the world engulfed in multiple escalating conflicts and heightened geopolitical tensions. Analysts warn it may encourage other nuclear and nuclear-aspiring nations to bolster their arsenals, further destabilising international security. However, efforts to salvage the situation are underway, with both the White House and the Kremlin indicating openness to some form of arrangement to uphold the treaty's limits despite its formal lapse. Even without a written agreement, experts suggest that various constraints make a sudden, unfettered nuclear arms race unlikely in the immediate term.
Political Posturing and Diplomatic Signals
In a post on his Truth Social platform, US President Donald Trump stated on Thursday that nuclear experts should work on a "new, improved, and modernised treaty" for the future, criticising New START as a "badly negotiated deal" that has been "grossly violated." Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov expressed Moscow's negative view of the pact's end, expressing regret but affirming readiness for dialogue with Washington. Russia's foreign ministry added that it remains prepared to take "decisive military-technical measures" to counter national security threats, hinting at potential nuclear expansion if deemed necessary.
Industrial Constraints and Existing Guardrails
Despite the treaty's expiration, experts highlight that smaller guardrails around arms control persist, even though quantitative caps on warhead numbers are now absent. Ankit Panda, author of The New Nuclear Age: At the Precipice of Armageddon, emphasised that current nuclear material production rates cannot compare to Cold War levels. He noted that the US has about 1,900 non-deployed warheads in reserve but faces industrial limitations, such as a target to produce only 30 plutonium pits by 2028, whereas during the 1960s peak, it produced around 2,000 annually.
Panda also pointed out that agreements like the 1988 ballistic missile launch notification deal and the 1989 strategic exercises notification pact remain in force, helping prevent inadvertent nuclear conflict. "While we are entering, for the first time in five decades, a world with no quantitative caps on forces or reduction plans, the US and Russia are not going back to zero," he explained.
Historical Context and Modern Realities
In 2017, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev warned of a potential new Cold War as tensions between Russia and the West intensified, accusing the US and its allies of abandoning peace agreements on nuclear weapons. Matt Korda, associate director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, described a full-scale arms race as a worst-case scenario. However, he argued that neither President Trump nor Russian President Vladimir Putin can afford nuclear expansion, citing the overtaxed nuclear enterprises in the US and Russia's struggling modernisation programmes, compounded by its industrial capacity being tied up in the conflict in Ukraine.
"It's not in Russia's interest to dramatically accelerate this ongoing arms race while its current modernisation programmes are going so poorly," Korda stated, suggesting that practical and economic factors may temper any rush toward nuclear proliferation.
