Russia and US discussed nuclear arms and agreed talks need to start soon, Kremlin says

The Nuclear Brink: What Happens Now That the Last US-Russia Arms Treaty Has Expired?

The expiration of the New START treaty on February 29th, 2024, marks a pivotal – and deeply concerning – moment in global security. For the first time in over half a century, the United States and Russia are no longer bound by any treaty limiting their nuclear arsenals. While recent talks in Abu Dhabi suggest a willingness to continue dialogue, the path forward is fraught with uncertainty. This isn’t just about numbers; it’s about a fundamental shift in the landscape of nuclear deterrence and the potential for a new arms race.

A Half-Century of Control: The History of Nuclear Arms Treaties

The New START treaty was the latest in a series of agreements dating back to the Cold War, beginning with SALT I in 1972. These treaties weren’t simply about reducing weapons; they were about establishing predictability and transparency. On-site inspections, a key component of New START, allowed each side to verify the other’s compliance, building a fragile trust. The suspension of these inspections in 2020, ostensibly due to the pandemic, was a harbinger of the current crisis. The treaty limited each side to 1,550 deployed warheads and 700 delivery systems.

The Current Standoff: Russia, the US, and the China Factor

Russia’s willingness to discuss a potential informal extension, even as it formally allowed New START to lapse, signals a desire to avoid immediate escalation. However, Moscow insists on any extension being formalized, rejecting the idea of a temporary, unverified agreement. The core issue, from the US perspective, is the inclusion of China. Washington argues that any meaningful arms control regime must involve Beijing, given its rapidly expanding nuclear arsenal.

China, however, has consistently refused to participate in trilateral talks, arguing that its nuclear force is significantly smaller than those of the US and Russia and that it’s merely maintaining a credible deterrent. This position is increasingly difficult to maintain, as estimates suggest China is on track to double its nuclear warhead stockpile by 2035, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

Did you know? China is estimated to have around 500 nuclear warheads currently, compared to roughly 3,700 for the US and 4,380 for Russia (as of early 2024).

The Implications of an Unconstrained Arms Race

Without treaty limits, both the US and Russia are free to increase their nuclear arsenals. While neither side has indicated an immediate intention to do so, the lack of constraints creates a dangerous environment. The risk of miscalculation increases, particularly in a world already grappling with geopolitical tensions. A new arms race could also divert resources from other critical areas, such as economic development and climate change mitigation.

the expiration of New START could embolden other nations to pursue nuclear weapons. The principle of non-proliferation – the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons – relies heavily on the commitment of existing nuclear powers to reduce and limit their arsenals. If that commitment wavers, it could trigger a cascade of proliferation.

The US Position: A “Better Agreement” and Accusations Against China

The Biden administration, through officials like Under Secretary of State for Arms Control Thomas DiNanno, is advocating for a “better agreement” that includes China. DiNanno recently accused China of conducting covert nuclear explosive tests, a claim Beijing vehemently denies, calling it an attempt to “shift the blame.” This escalating rhetoric further complicates the prospects for meaningful dialogue.

Pro Tip: Understanding the nuances of arms control treaties requires recognizing that verification is just as important as limitation. Without robust inspection mechanisms, any agreement is vulnerable to mistrust and non-compliance.

Potential Future Trends and Scenarios

• Continued Dialogue, Limited Progress: The most likely scenario involves continued, but slow and difficult, negotiations. The US will likely continue to push for China’s inclusion, while Russia will focus on securing a bilateral agreement with the US.
• Informal Understandings: Despite Peskov’s dismissal of informal extensions, both sides might tacitly adhere to New START’s limits for a period, avoiding a rapid build-up while negotiations continue.
• Accelerated Modernization: Both the US and Russia are already investing heavily in modernizing their nuclear arsenals. Without treaty constraints, this modernization could accelerate, leading to the development of new and more destabilizing weapons systems.
• Regional Proliferation: A breakdown in arms control could encourage countries like Iran and North Korea to accelerate their nuclear programmes.

FAQ: New START and the Future of Nuclear Arms Control

• What was New START? The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, limiting US and Russian nuclear warheads and delivery systems.
• Why did New START expire? Russia and the US failed to agree on terms for a successor treaty, primarily due to disagreements over China’s inclusion.
• What are the risks of no treaty limits? Increased risk of miscalculation, a new arms race, and potential proliferation.
• Is China likely to join arms control talks? Currently, China shows no willingness to participate in trilateral negotiations.

The expiration of New START is a stark reminder of the fragility of peace and the enduring threat of nuclear war. The coming months and years will be critical in determining whether the world can avert a dangerous slide towards a new era of nuclear instability. The stakes could not be higher.

Want to learn more? Explore our archive of articles on international security and nuclear proliferation for deeper insights.