U.S. to spend $1 trillion on nuclear weapons over next decade
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
An unarmed Minuteman III launches during an operational test at Vandenberg Space Force Base, California. Photo: Olga Houtsma/DVIDS
It's going to cost nearly $1 trillion to operate, maintain and upgrade America's nuclear arsenal over the next decade — more per year ($95 billion) than what's spent on many federal agencies.
Why it matters: That eye-popping estimate from the Congressional Budget Office is catnip for critics, who argue Washington is spending blindly or that portions of the triad are vestigial.
Driving the news: The combined 2025-34 nuke plans of the Defense and Energy departments amount to $946 billion.
- In what have been a few wild days for the nuke-watching world — including India-Pakistan clashes and the U.S. Air Force saying it needs new silos for its already delayed and over-budget Sentinel missiles — the dollar figures jump out.
What they're saying: "The huge expenses tallied in this report were not anticipated at the outset of the nuclear modernization program," said Greg Mello, the director of Los Alamos Study Group, which monitors National Nuclear Security Administration sites and activities.
- "There will be no return to the 'heroic mode of production' for nuclear weapons," he added.
- "Even if Congress dumped $100 or $200 billion more on nuclear weapons, the system that produces them would not 'jump to the task' for years, if at all."
Our thought bubble: There's a lot on the table, even if you ignore requisite infrastructure upgrades at places like the Savannah River Site. Sentinel. B-21 Raider. Long-Range Standoff Weapon. Columbia-class submarines.
What we're watching: Where today's obsession with cheap mass (drones and artillery shells, for example) clashes with revered and rarely used stockpiles.
- Nuclear acquisition programs represent almost 12% of the Defense Department's planned buying costs over the next decade, according to the CBO. That means DOD will have to make "difficult choices about which programs to pursue."
- Arms Control Association executive director Daryl Kimball in a piece this month said "skyrocketing" prices siphon resources from "other more pressing human needs and national security priorities."
Yes, but: There are businesspeople who think it can be done more effectively.
- "What we see here is the really strong need for the U.S. government, specifically on the topic of nuclear deterrence, to look at opportunities to work with" the private sector, JC Btaiche, the founder of Fuse, told Axios.
- Fuse seeks to be the "new nuclear-security prime," as Btaiche put it. Its advisers include Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, the former NNSA boss, and retired Adm. Charles Richard, once the head of Strategic Command.
The bottom line: "The current trend is only going to continue to increase costs and delay timelines," Btaiche said, "and we just cannot afford to do that as a country."
Go deeper: A new nuke wave washes over the world
