Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia has asserted a significantly reduced presence on the global stage. The breakup of what former US President Ronald Reagan labeled an “evil empire” resulted in a diminished territory, financial capacity, and overall influence for the Kremlin.
Despite this decline, Russia has maintained a critical advantage in nuclear capability, holding a position as a nuclear superpower roughly equivalent to that of the United States. This ongoing status has allowed Moscow to participate in key international dialogues regarding security, often finding itself seated alongside the US leader at nuclear summits—a scenario reminiscent of the Cold War era.
In April 2010, a pivotal agreement known as the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was reached between then-US President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. This treaty set a cap of 1,550 deployed long-range nuclear warheads for each nation, which was celebrated at the time as a historic step towards arms reduction. However, as the treaty’s expiration approached, concerns surrounding arms control between the two nations seemed to escalate.
The end of the New START treaty, which officially expired recently, was met with contrasting sentiments from both governments. While the Trump administration maintained an indifferent stance—indicating that if the treaty expired, it might lead to a subsequent “better” deal—the response from Moscow was decidedly anxious. Medvedev, now a senior security official, highlighted the significant consequences of allowing the treaty to lapse, suggesting it could hasten the “Doomsday Clock,” a symbol of global existential risks.
The Kremlin expressed alarm at the potential fallout from the treaty’s expiration. According to spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, the absence of a formal framework governing nuclear arsenals between the US and Russia could usher in a troubling era of insecurity. Peskov warned that without the New START provisions, the two nations—holders of the world’s largest nuclear stockpiles—would lack crucial controls over their arsenals, a situation he deemed harmful for global strategic security.
Interestingly, the Kremlin’s apprehensions could stem from self-interested motivations. Beyond losing a platform that symbolizes their remaining influence from the Soviet era, Russia faces the risk of increased US nuclear capabilities without corresponding limits. The Trump administration has proposed reintroducing nuclear-armed ships, echoing strategies that were set aside decades earlier, a move that would further widen the gap in military power.
Additionally, the US harbors its strategic goals for nuclear arms control, including the aspiration to incorporate China into future agreements, reflecting a shift in priorities from bilateral to multilateral approaches in arms control.
The expiration of the New START treaty represents a significant turning point in the landscape of nuclear arms control, signaling not only the end of foundational agreements between superpowers but also a shift in the US’s willingness to accept limitations on nuclear expansion. As both nations navigate this new reality, the potential for international insecurity looms larger than ever, highlighting the importance of continued dialogue and cooperation in nuclear disarmament efforts.