As ‘New START’ nears its expiry, last nuclear brake is failing; is world headed back to an arms race? | World News

New Delhi: The global nuclear order is heading towards an uncertain moment. In February 2026, the last remaining nuclear arms reduction agreement between the United States and Russia will expire. Known as the New START treaty, it has for years served as a fragile barrier against uncontrolled nuclear expansion.

At the same time, many countries are expanding their nuclear stockpiles. Others who do not have nuclear weapons are exploring ways to obtain them. These developments cause serious concern. Are global efforts to reduce nuclear weapons slowing down or stalling altogether?

How did the nuclear arms race begin?

The nuclear arms race began during World War II. Germany, the United States, and the United Kingdom were working to build an atomic bomb. Washington, London and Canada joined forces to achieve this goal before Germany. This secret effort became known as the Manhattan Project.

The project succeeded in developing the atomic bomb at Los Alamos. The United States is the only country that uses nuclear weapons in war. Information about the Manhattan Project eventually reached the Soviet Union through espionage. Shortly thereafter, the Soviet Union launched its own nuclear program and conducted its first test in 1949 in Kazakhstan, which was then part of its territory.

This situation led to a nuclear arms race between the two superpowers. Both sides gradually realized that it was necessary to avoid nuclear war. Discussions about controlling these weapons have begun, although meaningful action may take years.

Early control attempts

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the United States and the Soviet Union began negotiations to limit strategic weapons such as intercontinental missiles. These talks led to SALT I in 1971 and SALT II in 1979.

SALT I set the first limit on the number of nuclear missiles. Not all strategic weapons are included. SALT II encountered difficulties after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which led to official US disapproval. Despite this, both parties largely complied with its terms.

A major breakthrough occurred in 1987 with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. According to this agreement, both sides agreed to eliminate nuclear missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. Verification measures have also been put in place. The agreement signaled a shared desire to move towards a world with fewer nuclear weapons.

Disputes later arose over the alleged violations. Then came the accusations and denials. The United States withdrew from the agreement in 2019. Russia later backed out of its commitments.

Who has nuclear weapons today?

Today, nine countries have nuclear weapons. Together they carry approximately 13,000 warheads. There are around 4,000 in Russia. The United States has about 3,700. Other nuclear-armed countries include India, Pakistan, North Korea, France and the United Kingdom. Israel neither confirms nor denies having nuclear weapons, but estimates suggest it may have them.

In the 1960s, more countries began to join the nuclear club. This increased fears that nuclear war could destroy the world. The Cuban Missile Crisis brought these fears closer to reality before diplomacy calmed the situation.

NPT’s role

In 1970, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty came into force. According to this agreement, countries with nuclear weapons committed to reducing their arsenals. Countries that do not have nuclear weapons have agreed not to develop them. In return they were promised access to peaceful nuclear technology.

This arrangement helped reduce global stockpiles from about 70,000 warheads during the Cold War to about 13,000 today. Tracking these weapons has always been difficult. Still, the agreement slowed the spread of nuclear weapons.

A total of 191 countries signed the NPT. India, Pakistan and Israel are excluded. North Korea joined and later withdrew. Sanctions and restrictions have been imposed on some countries to limit access to sensitive technologies.

Over time, trust weakened, promises were not fulfilled and political will weakened. However, the agreement largely achieved its main goal. Far fewer countries have acquired nuclear weapons than once feared.

What did ‘New START’ change?

New START was designed to limit the most destructive nuclear weapons held by the United States and Russia. Negotiations began in 2009 and the agreement came into force in 2011.

Under its terms, deployed nuclear warheads were limited to 1,550 per country. Just as importantly, the agreement brought transparency. Both sides exchanged data twice a year. Inspections at nuclear facilities were allowed up to 18 times a year.

Problems arose after the COVID epidemic disrupted inspections. Tensions increased following the war in Ukraine. Inspections were stopped and accusations of violations followed.

The agreement has already been extended once in 2021. This option is no longer available. When it expires in February 2026, replacement parts are not readily available.

What happens after time expires?

With the expiration of New START, the global arms control system stands on shaky ground. There will be no binding rules to limit the nuclear forces of the United States and Russia. Sudden expansion may not occur immediately. But the absence of rules will eliminate restrictions.

It takes years to create a new agreement. The chances of a broader agreement covering other nuclear powers appear even lower. China sees no reason to join, citing its smaller arsenal. India would point to Pakistan. Pakistan will respond in the same way. Reconciliation seems distant.

The collapse of nuclear diplomacy has already damaged trust. The disruption of negotiations following the attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities further increased this erosion. Nuclear threats during the Ukraine war deepened fears among non-nuclear states.

Many countries are now questioning whether security guarantees are still valid. Some may reconsider their long-standing decision not to pursue nuclear weapons.

A dangerous moment

Uncertainty is increasing as the end of the latest US-Russia nuclear weapons agreement approaches. Allies feel less secure, opponents feel less constrained. The belief that nuclear weapons guarantee security is gaining strength once again.

The risk may not be immediate. The danger lies next. A world without borders, controls and trust. A world drifting into the shadows of the Cold War. Luck may not be enough this time.