Death of New START heralds 'a world with more nuclear risk'

The expiration of the New START treaty marks a dangerous turning point in nuclear arms control, removing the last remaining limits on U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear arsenals. Without this agreement, both nations are free to expand their nuclear capabilities without constraint, potentially triggering a new arms race with far-reaching consequences for global security.

The end of an era in arms control

The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) was signed in 2010 and had been extended until 2026. It limited each country to 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads and 700 deployed missiles and bombers. The treaty also included verification measures and data exchanges that provided transparency into each nation's nuclear forces.

With New START's expiration, these guardrails disappear. The United States and Russia can now build as many nuclear weapons as they choose, and the world loses the ability to verify compliance through inspections and monitoring.

What this means for global security

Nuclear experts warn that the treaty's demise creates several dangerous scenarios:

• Increased uncertainty: Without verification mechanisms, both sides must assume the worst about the other's capabilities and intentions
• Arms race incentives: The absence of limits may encourage both nations to expand their arsenals to maintain strategic parity
• Reduced crisis stability: With more weapons and less transparency, the risk of miscalculation during tensions increases
• Weakened global norms: The collapse of arms control agreements undermines the entire framework of nuclear non-proliferation

The technology factor

The end of New START comes at a time when both nations are investing heavily in new nuclear delivery systems. The U.S. is developing the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile to replace aging Minuteman III missiles, while Russia continues to field new systems like the Sarmat heavy ICBM and the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle.

These technological advances make the absence of arms control even more concerning. Modern nuclear weapons are more accurate, harder to detect, and can be launched from multiple platforms including submarines, bombers, and ground-based missiles.

What happens next

The Biden administration has expressed interest in pursuing a new arms control agreement, but negotiations with Russia have been complicated by the war in Ukraine and broader geopolitical tensions. China, which has been rapidly expanding its nuclear forces, has shown little interest in joining trilateral talks.

In the meantime, both the U.S. and Russia are likely to conduct extensive nuclear force reviews to determine their optimal force structures in a world without treaty constraints. These reviews could lead to significant changes in deployment patterns, alert levels, and modernization priorities.

The path forward

Restoring nuclear arms control will require overcoming significant political obstacles. Any new agreement would need to address not just U.S. and Russian arsenals but also the growing Chinese nuclear buildup. Verification measures would need to be updated for modern weapons systems and delivery methods.

The alternative—a world without nuclear arms control—means living with greater uncertainty, higher risks, and the constant possibility that a crisis could escalate to nuclear use. As one arms control expert put it, the death of New START heralds "a world with more nuclear risk," and that risk affects every person on the planet.

The illustration depicts the stark reality of a world without nuclear arms control, where the absence of treaties like New START leaves global security hanging in the balance.