Death of New START heralds "a world with more nuclear risk"
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios
Tomorrow, the world lurches toward an age of international uncertainty and increased nuclear-weapons spending. New START is expiring.
Why it matters: The treaty capped and encouraged inspections of the deployed nuclear arsenals of the U.S. and Russia — Cold War rivals with shared animosity and some 85% of the world's warheads.
- "Feb. 5 is going to mark the end of an era," Kingston Reif, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for threat reduction and arms control, told Axios.
- "The treaty was a huge net benefit for U.S. national security."
Driving the news: One expert told Axios arms control was slipping into a coma. Another said it was on life support. They all warned of long-term consequences should another deal — even by handshake, as Russian leader Vladimir Putin suggested — not be consummated.
- "In the post-New START environment, the United States will have to learn — and we're not going to like it — to live in a world with more nuclear risk facing the United States, regardless of the choices we make about the composition of our nuclear forces," said Ankit Panda at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Zoom in: New START's expiry was foreseen. The five-year extension agreed to in 2021 ends here. The chance for meaningful follow-ons, however, was stymied by major world events:
- The COVID pandemic and a cessation of inspections;
- Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine and continued subterfuge across Europe;
- And President Trump's insistence that any future deal also constrain China, which is rapidly developing its still much smaller stockpile.
"There have been many ups and downs," said Rose Gottemoeller, New START's lead negotiator.
- "We have been able to have really strong, mutual predictability about what's going on in each other's nuclear force postures; that has been very important now for decades," she added. "I think it is somewhat worrisome that the treaty is going out of force without something new in sight."
- That said, Gottemoeller, a self-described optimist, thinks Trump "could get a new treaty through the Senate."
- "Presidents like to be on that big stage of saving humanity from nuclear conflagration."
By the numbers: A vast majority (91%) of registered voters think the U.S. should negotiate a new deal with Russia to maintain current limits or further reduce both countries' nukes, according to a YouGov poll commissioned by ReThink Media and the Nuclear Threat Initiative.
- "While I don't think most Americans could tell you what New START is, I think a lot of Americans are still worried about the possibility of a nuclear exchange," NTI president and former Army Secretary Christine Wormuth told Axios. "They read the papers — or on their phones — and they've heard Putin rattling his nuclear saber."
- That includes the Oreshnik missile and Poseidon torpedo. Meanwhile, Trump has suggested resuming some sort of nuclear weapons testing.
Between the lines: An immediate stateside buildout beyond New START levels would rely on delivery systems and warheads already on hand.
- The Sentinel nuclear missile and the Columbia-class submarine, for example, are years behind schedule.
What we're watching: How France, Germany, Poland and the U.K. react.
- It was less than a year ago when Eurobomb discussions reignited and the countries debated deterrence without Washington.
More from Axios:
New tritium harvesting record set for U.S. nukes
Trump's nuclear dilemma: "Greatest threat" is getting bigger
U.S. to spend $1 trillion on nuclear weapons over next decade
