New START Treaty Lapses, Raising Specter of Unchecked Nuclear Buildup
MOSCOW — An era of nuclear arms control between the United States and Russia formally ended Thursday with the expiration of the New START treaty, dismantling the last remaining pact that had capped the size of the world's two largest atomic arsenals for over half a century.
The lapse of the 2010 agreement, which had limited deployed strategic warheads and launchers, opens a volatile new chapter in great-power relations. Analysts warn it removes critical transparency and predictability, potentially setting the stage for a costly and dangerous nuclear buildup.
"The safety rails are off," said a senior European diplomat speaking on condition of anonymity. "We are entering uncharted and perilous territory where miscalculation becomes far more likely."
The treaty's demise follows years of escalating tensions over Ukraine, cybersecurity, and geopolitical influence. Last year, Russian President Vladimir Putin suspended Moscow's participation in the treaty's verification regime, though Russia pledged to stay within the warhead limits. In a final diplomatic overture, Putin had expressed willingness to extend the pact's core limits for one year to allow for negotiations, contingent on U.S. reciprocity. The Biden administration, however, did not accept the offer, citing Russia's non-compliance with inspection protocols.
Kremlin adviser Yuri Ushakov confirmed that Putin discussed the impending expiration with Chinese leader Xi Jinping on Wednesday, noting the lack of a U.S. response to the extension proposal. Ushakov stated Russia would act "in a balanced and responsible manner" based on a thorough security analysis.
In a statement Wednesday night, Russia's Foreign Ministry declared that the parties are "fundamentally free to choose their next steps," no longer bound by the treaty's obligations.
New START, signed by Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, capped each side at 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads and 700 deployed missiles and bombers. It included a robust system of on-site inspections, which ground to a halt in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic and never resumed. The treaty was extended in 2021 for five years, buying time for a successor agreement that never materialized.
Its expiration marks the culmination of a steady erosion of the bilateral arms control framework that began during the Cold War. Treaties like the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty have been abandoned in recent years, leaving a vacuum in strategic stability.
Expert Reactions:
"This is a sobering but not unexpected milestone," said Dr. Anya Petrova, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic Studies. "The institutional architecture for managing this rivalry is gone. The immediate risk isn't a sprint to build thousands of new warheads, but a slow, opaque creep in capabilities and a loss of crisis communication channels."
"It's a catastrophic failure of diplomacy," argued Mark Thorne, a former Pentagon official and now a vocal critic. "Both capitals are to blame, but this administration's hesitancy and Russia's blatant bad faith have handed the world a less secure future. We're now gambling with strategic stability based on hope, not verification."
"While concerning, this also presents an opportunity," commented General James Wilcox (Ret.). "The old bilateral model is outdated. Any new framework must be multilateral, involving China and other nuclear players. The expiration of New START forces that necessary, albeit difficult, conversation."
"This makes me sick with fear for my children's future," said Elara Vance, activist with the Global Zero campaign. "Our leaders are playing a game of nuclear chicken while dismantling the very rules that kept us safe. It's an utter abdication of their most basic responsibility. They are normalizing the unthinkable."
The path forward remains unclear. U.S. and Russian officials have indicated a theoretical openness to future talks, but no dates have been set, and the deep rift over Ukraine continues to poison the well. For now, the world's nuclear superpowers are navigating a new landscape defined not by mutual limits, but by mutual suspicion.