**
The expiration of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) on February 5, 2026, has raised significant concerns regarding the potential for a renewed arms race between the United States and Russia. This treaty, which was originally signed in 2010, mandated strict limits on nuclear arsenals, capping each nation at 1,550 deployed warheads and 700 delivery systems. With nearly 85% of the world’s strategic nuclear weapons held by these two countries, the absence of this critical agreement could unravel decades of progress in arms control.
The End of an Era
The conclusion of New START dismantles a pivotal framework that has helped manage nuclear tensions since its inception. Experts warn that without this treaty, both nations could be tempted to expand their arsenals, reminiscent of the Cold War era’s arms competition. This is particularly alarming given the current backdrop of geopolitical instability and rising hostilities in various regions, which may incentivise other nations to bolster their nuclear capabilities as well.
In light of these developments, dialogues are reportedly in motion, with both Washington and Moscow exploring potential agreements to uphold the treaty’s principles despite its formal expiration. US President Donald Trump, in a statement on his social media platform, suggested a new, modernised treaty as a preferable alternative to the old framework, which he described as poorly negotiated. On the other hand, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov expressed Russia’s regret over the treaty’s termination but emphasised Moscow’s readiness to engage in dialogue with the United States.
Remaining Constraints on Arms Control
Despite the treaty’s lapse, analysts assert that certain existing mechanisms continue to provide a measure of restraint against the unchecked proliferation of nuclear weapons. Ankit Panda, author of *The New Nuclear Age: At the Precipice of Armageddon*, highlighted that while the treaty’s quantitative limits have vanished, other agreements still function to mitigate the risk of accidental nuclear conflict. These include longstanding agreements on ballistic missile launch notifications and the notification of strategic military exercises, which were established in the late 1980s.
Panda noted the stark differences between today’s nuclear landscape and that of the Cold War, pointing out that the United States currently holds approximately 1,900 non-deployed warheads in reserve. He argued that the capacity for a competitive arms race is limited, with the US aiming to produce 30 plutonium pits per year by 2028, a far cry from the 2,000 pits produced at the height of Cold War tensions.
The Global Context: A New Cold War?
Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev has previously warned of a potential resurgence of Cold War dynamics, citing rising tensions between Russia and the West. He has accused Western nations of straying from nuclear peace agreements, which could exacerbate global instability. Matt Korda, from the Federation of American Scientists, echoed these fears, suggesting that neither Trump nor Russian President Vladimir Putin could realistically pursue aggressive nuclear expansion due to their respective countries’ strained nuclear capabilities.
Korda highlighted that Russia’s ongoing military commitments, particularly in Ukraine, could hinder its ability to escalate nuclear programmes. He posited that a cautious approach, such as the one-year maintenance deal proposed by Putin, reflects an understanding that a rapid arms race would not be in Russia’s best interest at this time.
Why it Matters
The expiration of the New START treaty signifies a pivotal moment in nuclear diplomacy, raising the stakes for global security. Without the treaty’s framework, the risk of renewed arms competition looms large, potentially destabilising an already fragile international order. While existing agreements may provide some level of restraint, the absence of formal limitations on nuclear arsenals invites uncertainty. As the world grapples with multiple crises, the need for robust dialogue and innovative arms control measures has never been more essential. The actions of both the US and Russia in the coming months will be crucial in determining whether the lessons of history will be heeded or forgotten, as the spectre of nuclear conflict continues to haunt global relations.