The End of Arms Control: What Does It Mean for Nuclear Stability?
The expiration of the Recent START treaty marks a pivotal moment in international security, signaling the end of an era of formal limitations on strategic nuclear weapons between the United States and Russia. While not necessarily heralding a new arms race, it does usher in a period of uncertainty and evolving dynamics. The question now isn’t simply whether an arms race will occur, but how the major players – the U.S., Russia and China – will navigate this new landscape.
Beyond New START: A History of Disarmament
The demise of New START follows a gradual erosion of arms control agreements. The U.S. Withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty collapsed in 2019 due to alleged Russian violations. New START, signed in 2010, was the last major agreement featuring on-site inspections for verification of limits on warheads and launchers. Its expiration leaves a void in transparency and predictability.
Russia’s Position: Modernization and Constraints
Despite concerns about a rapid buildup, Russia faces significant constraints. While ahead in nuclear modernization compared to the U.S. On paper, its defense industrial base and struggling economy limit its ability to sustain a full-scale arms race. Moscow will likely prioritize maintaining its status as a nuclear peer to the U.S. And ensuring a hedge against potential breakthroughs in U.S. Missile defense or counterforce capabilities. Russia’s advantage lies in its non-strategic nuclear weapons and diverse delivery systems, which were never covered by New START.
Recent estimates suggest Russia has around 1,718 strategic warheads deployed, with the potential to upload hundreds more. Still, production of new delivery systems, like the Sarmat ICBM, is behind schedule. Novel systems like the Poseidon torpedo and Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle will be deployed in limited quantities, not fundamentally altering the strategic balance.
The U.S. Response: Addressing Asymmetries
The U.S. Is also not without its challenges. While possessing greater technological and economic resources, its own modernization programs face delays and cost overruns. The Columbia-class submarine and LGM-35A Sentinel ICBM are both experiencing setbacks. Under Secretary of State for Arms Control Thomas DiNanno emphasized the need to address the asymmetry in forces, particularly Russia’s advantage in non-strategic nuclear weapons.
The U.S. Retains non-deployed nuclear capacity that can be used to address the emerging security environment. Potential responses include uploading warheads onto existing systems, expanding forward-deployed forces, and investing in greater force diversity.
China’s Growing Role
China’s expanding nuclear arsenal is a critical factor. Historically, U.S. Nuclear strategy focused on deterring Russia. Now, China is increasingly in the equation. The U.S. Position is that future arms control must include Russia and China, not harm U.S. Interests or ignore noncompliance. China’s nuclear arsenal is projected to reach 1,000 deployed strategic warheads by 2030.
The Path Forward: Deterrence and Parity
Despite the expiration of New START, a full-scale arms race isn’t inevitable. Russia has little to gain from such a scenario and may even seek to avoid it due to economic constraints. Moscow has offered to maintain New START quantitative limits, and talks are reportedly underway to continue observing those limits for at least six months.
the future of nuclear stability will depend on a complex interplay of factors, including technological developments, economic realities, and political considerations. The key question, as DiNanno posed, is “How much deterrence is enough?”
FAQ: Navigating the New Nuclear Landscape
Q: Will the end of New START definitely lead to a new arms race?
A: Not necessarily. While the risk is increased, economic and industrial constraints, particularly for Russia, may limit the scope of any buildup.
Q: What is Russia’s advantage in nuclear weapons?
A: Russia holds an advantage in non-strategic nuclear weapons and the diversity of its delivery systems.
Q: Is the U.S. Behind in nuclear modernization?
A: On paper, Russia appears ahead, but the U.S. Possesses greater technological and economic resources and retains non-deployed nuclear capacity.
Q: What role does China play in this new dynamic?
A: China’s growing nuclear arsenal is a significant factor, prompting the U.S. To consider a broader approach to arms control that includes all major players.
Did you know? Russia’s novel nuclear weapon systems, like the Poseidon torpedo and Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle, will be deployed in small quantities and are unlikely to fundamentally alter the strategic balance.
Pro Tip: Understanding the interplay between strategic and non-strategic nuclear weapons is crucial for assessing the risks and opportunities in the current environment.
Explore more insights on international security and arms control on War on the Rocks.
