The New START treaty, the last remaining nuclear arms control agreement between the United States and Russia, has expired, marking a significant shift in the global security landscape. The treaty’s lapse, effective , removes the last formal constraints on the size of the two countries’ nuclear arsenals, raising fears of a renewed arms race reminiscent of the Cold War era.
Signed in 2010, New START limited each side to no more than 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads and 700 deployed missiles and bombers. It also allowed for inspections to verify compliance. While both nations adhered to the treaty’s limits throughout its lifespan, the future of arms control has been increasingly uncertain in recent years, particularly following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The expiration follows a period of escalating tensions between Washington and Moscow. Russia had previously signaled its willingness to extend the treaty, but with conditions. In 2019, then-President Trump rejected an offer from Vladimir Putin for a one-year extension of the New START deployment limits, a decision that signaled a diminishing U.S. Interest in such agreements. This rejection, coupled with the subsequent withdrawal of the U.S. From other arms control treaties like the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, has contributed to the current situation.
The end of New START isn’t necessarily an immediate trigger for a massive build-up of nuclear weapons. Both countries already possess vast arsenals capable of inflicting catastrophic damage. However, the treaty’s absence removes a crucial layer of predictability and transparency. Without the verification mechanisms provided by New START, assessing the other side’s capabilities and intentions becomes significantly more difficult, increasing the risk of miscalculation and escalation.
Analysts at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) suggest the treaty’s end represents a symbolic blow to Russia’s self-perception as a superpower. For decades, Russia has positioned itself as a nuclear power on par with the United States and New START provided a framework for acknowledging that status, albeit within defined limits. The treaty’s expiration, coupled with Russia’s struggles in Ukraine, challenges this narrative and potentially weakens its geopolitical standing.
The financial implications of a renewed arms race are substantial. Developing, producing, and maintaining nuclear weapons systems is extraordinarily expensive. Increased spending on nuclear arsenals would likely divert resources from other areas, such as economic development, social programs, and infrastructure. For the United States, this could exacerbate existing budgetary pressures and potentially lead to higher taxes or cuts in other government programs. For Russia, already facing economic challenges due to sanctions and the war in Ukraine, a renewed arms race could further strain its economy.
The impact extends beyond direct military spending. A heightened sense of insecurity and mistrust could lead to increased investment in defense industries globally. Companies involved in the production of military equipment, such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman in the U.S., and Rostec and Almaz-Antey in Russia, could see increased demand for their products and services. However, this increased demand comes at the cost of diverting resources from more productive sectors of the economy.
The expiration of New START also has implications for international financial markets. Increased geopolitical risk typically leads to a flight to safety, with investors seeking refuge in assets like U.S. Treasury bonds and gold. This could result in lower bond yields and higher gold prices. Increased uncertainty could dampen investor sentiment and lead to a decline in stock markets, particularly in sectors sensitive to geopolitical events, such as energy and aerospace.
The absence of New START doesn’t preclude future arms control negotiations, but the current political climate makes such talks unlikely in the near term. Restoring trust and establishing a constructive dialogue between Washington and Moscow will be essential for any future progress. Without a renewed commitment to arms control, the world faces a more dangerous and unpredictable future, with the risk of nuclear conflict looming larger than it has in decades.
The situation also raises questions about the role of other nuclear powers, such as China. China is rapidly expanding its nuclear arsenal, and its growing capabilities are a major concern for the United States. Some analysts argue that a trilateral arms control agreement involving the U.S., Russia, and China is necessary to prevent a full-scale arms race. However, China has so far resisted calls for such negotiations.
For now, the expiration of New START represents a significant setback for global security. The lack of constraints on nuclear weapons, coupled with heightened geopolitical tensions, creates a volatile environment with potentially far-reaching consequences for markets, economies, and international stability. The coming months will be critical in determining whether the world is entering a new era of nuclear competition.
