Even at the height of the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union negotiated a series of nuclear arms treaties to prevent their rivalry from spiralling into uncontrolled escalation. From 1969 until well after the Soviet collapse in 1991, these agreements capped arsenals and created predictability, providing a framework for strategic stability even amidst deep political distrust. Despite disagreements in other areas, both nations recognized that arms control was essential to avoid catastrophic outcomes.
New START Expiration Approaches
The last remaining U.S.-Russia nuclear treaty, New START, is set to expire on February 5, 2026. The treaty limits each side to 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads and includes verification mechanisms such as inspections and data exchanges. However, the war in Ukraine has overshadowed arms control discussions, and no talks have yet taken place on a successor agreement. The looming expiration raises concerns about a return to unchecked nuclear competition between the world’s two largest arsenals.
Putin Offers Extension, U.S. Response Pending
In September 2025, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed a 12-month extension of New START’s limits. While such an extension could provide time for negotiating a successor and signal a commitment to arms control, critics argue it would allow Russia to continue developing new weapons systems outside the treaty’s scope, including the Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile and the Poseidon nuclear torpedo. Since 2023, Russia has refused mutual inspections, leaving the United States unable to verify compliance. Accepting the extension could also send a signal to China that U.S. strategic forces will not expand in response to Beijing’s rapid nuclear buildup.
Global Nuclear Landscape
Russia and the United States currently hold an estimated 5,459 and 5,177 warheads respectively, together accounting for nearly 87% of the world’s nuclear arsenal. China’s arsenal, estimated at 600 warheads, is expanding quickly, with the Pentagon projecting over 1,000 by 2030. Meanwhile, the nuclear forces of NATO members Britain and France, which Russia has suggested including in future negotiations, remain outside current arms control agreements. Beijing has rejected proposals for three-way negotiations, citing the disproportionate size of U.S. and Russian arsenals.
Risk Reduction and Confidence Building
Experts, including former Russian negotiator Nikolai Sokov, argue that negotiating a comprehensive multilateral treaty under current conditions is extremely complex and likely to take years. Instead, they suggest focusing on risk reduction measures to prevent accidental nuclear escalation. For example, only the U.S. and Russia maintain a 24/7 crisis hotline; no European capitals have direct lines to Moscow, highlighting a gap in communication that could prove dangerous in a crisis.
Global Implications
The expiration of New START carries significant implications for global security. Without limits, U.S. and Russian arsenals could expand unchecked, potentially sparking a new arms race and encouraging other nuclear powers to accelerate their programs. The lack of a binding framework undermines confidence-building mechanisms and heightens regional tensions in Europe and Asia. It also complicates efforts to engage China in arms control, increasing the risk that nuclear competition could extend to three major powers rather than remain bilateral.
Personal Analysis
The impending expiration of New START underscores the fragility of the global arms control regime. While a temporary extension may prevent immediate escalation, it risks creating a perception that nuclear arsenals can grow without consequence. The priority in the short term should be reducing the risk of accidental conflict, improving crisis communication, and maintaining verification protocols. Any long-term successor treaty will require careful balancing of verification, modernization, and multilateral participation. Until then, the world faces increased uncertainty in nuclear stability, with potential ramifications for global security and diplomacy.
With information from Reuters.
