For years and years, the United States and Russia — the world’s two biggest nuclear powers — were kept in check through a number of treaties. However, today (February 5) marks the expiry of the last nuclear weapons control treaty between the two countries, raising fears of a new arms race.
On February 5, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, known as ‘New Start’, comes to an end, with UN secretary general, António Guterres, calling it a “grave moment for international peace and security”.
As New Start lapses, here’s a better look at what the agreement entails, and what it could mean for Washington and Moscow, and the world at large.
What is the New Start treaty?
The
New Start treaty was signed in 2010 by US President Barack Obama and then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, a close ally of Vladimir Putin. Coming into effect in 2011, the agreement saw the US and Russia agree to reduce their nuclear stockpiles, which ballooned in the early decades of the Cold War.
Notably, New Start was an extension of earlier agreements signed between the two nations.
The New Start treaty, which was extended for a one five-year duration in Joe Biden’s presidency, limits both countries to 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers equipped to transport nuclear weapons; 1,550 nuclear warheads on these vehicles; and 800 “deployed and non-deployed” launchers. It also places limits on Russian intercontinental nuclear weapons that can reach the US.
The treaty provides for 18 on-site inspections per year for each side — though these have not happened for several years, dating back to the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic.
It also allowed for twice-yearly exchanges of data and ongoing mutual notification about the movement of strategic nuclear forces, which in practice occurred on a nearly daily basis.
Last but not the least, New Start also established a bilateral consultative commission and clear procedures to resolve questions or disputes.
In 2023, amid Russia’s war in Ukraine, Vladimir Putin announced that
Moscow was suspending participation in New Start, citing Washington’s support for Ukraine during the war. It, however, did not formally withdraw, and committed to continue to abide by the treaty’s numerical limits on warheads, missiles and launchers.
What have US and Russia said about New Start treaty?
Last July, US President Donald Trump when asked about New Start said, “It’s not an agreement you want expiring. When you take off nuclear restrictions, that’s a big problem for the world.”
But earlier this January, Trump made a stunning reversal, telling the New York Times, “If it expires, it expires. We’ll do a better agreement.” The American leader further complaining that there were “weaknesses” in the agreement and said he would rather “do a new agreement that’s much better.”
Trump further stated that he would like to include
China in any nuclear talks. “We are talking about limiting nuclear weapons. We will get China into that.”
Meanwhile, last September Russia’s strongman Putin had noted that both countries should just keep abiding by the warhead limits, without a formal deal, for one more year.
“To avoid provoking a further strategic arms race and to ensure an acceptable level of predictability and restraint, we believe it is justified to try to maintain the status quo established by the New START treaty during the current, rather turbulent period,” Putin said in televised remarks at the Kremlin.
Medvedev, the initial signatory to the New Start treaty, on the other hand warned that if the New START treaty expires, it would mean the biggest nuclear powers will have unlimited capacity to expand their nuclear programmes for the first time since the 1970s.
“I don’t want to say that this immediately means a catastrophe and a nuclear war will begin, but it should still alarm everyone,” Medvedev was quoted as saying.
When asked about the New Start treaty, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that “this is very bad for global and strategic security”.
How are others reacting to lapse of New Start treaty?
The lapse of the New Start treaty has the world on tenterhooks. UN Secretary General Guterres in a statement on Wednesday, said: “For the first time in more than half a century, we face a world without any binding limits on the strategic nuclear arsenals of … the two states that possess the overwhelming majority of the global stockpile of nuclear weapons.”
He said New Start and other arms control treaties had “drastically improved the security of all peoples”.
“This dissolution of decades of achievement could not come at a worse time — the risk of a nuclear weapon being used is the highest in decades,” he added.
Pope Leo XIV also urged both nations not to abandon the principles laid down by the treaty. “I issue an urgent appeal not to let this instrument lapse,” said the Pope at his weekly audience. “It is more urgent than ever to replace the logic of fear and distrust with a shared ethic, capable of guiding choices toward the common good.”
What does the expiry of New Start mean for the world?
In the absence of New Start, both countries could build up their nuclear warheads and launchers unchecked, as legal limits would no longer be in place.
As Georgia Cole, research associate on the international security programme, wrote in a Chatham House article, “This would mark a significant break in more than five decades of bilateral nuclear arms control. It would also signal a move away from nuclear restraint, making the world a more dangerous place.”
“It increases the risk of a new arms race, especially if either side begins uploading additional warheads onto existing missiles or expanding delivery systems.”
Even Daryl Kimball, the head of the Arms Control Association in Washington, stated that the end of New Start could result in a dangerous arms race. “There are many in the nuclear weapons establishment who want to rapidly build up the size of the US force in order to counter China’s strategic buildup,” Kimball said.
Kingston Reif of the RAND Corporation, a former US deputy assistant secretary of defence, speaking to the Associated Press, stated “in the absence of the predictability of the treaty, each side could be incentivised to plan for the worst or to increase their deployed arsenals to show toughness and resolve, or to search for negotiating leverage.”
The lapse of the New Start treaty could also threaten the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty (NPT) – which is up for review this year – under which states without nuclear weapons pledged not to acquire them, as long as the weapons states made good-faith efforts to disarm.
There’s a very good chance that if the two nations start expanding their nuclear arsenals, others could follow suit.
Could US and Russia figure out a new deal?
With New Start expiring, questions have been raised if a new agreement could be signed between the two nations. But experts note that it won’t be easy; figuring out a fresh, comprehensive treaty would likely take a long time.
Trump also wants China to be party to a new treaty. Beijing hasn’t been receptive to joining trilateral arms control talks while its nuclear arsenal is far smaller than those of the US and Russia. It’s unlikely to sign onto an accord that locks in asymmetrical capabilities.
Georgia Cole also told the Washington Post that “negotiating a new treaty in the current geopolitical environment would be extraordinarily difficult. It requires years of technical work, trust, and diplomatic engagement — none of which currently exist at the necessary levels.”
The expiry of the New Start treaty comes at the worst time possible. But it’s now up to countries to decide if they want to further arm themselves or choose peace.
With inputs from agencies
End of Article
