As the world watches anxiously, Russia has reiterated that it is waiting for a formal response from the United States on President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to extend the last remaining bilateral nuclear arms control agreement.
The New START treaty, a cornerstone of strategic nuclear arms reduction between Moscow and Washington, is set to expire on February 5, leaving less than 60 days to avert a potentially destabilizing gap in nuclear oversight.
New START: A Critical Check on Global Nuclear Arms
The New START treaty, formally known as the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, was signed in 2010 to curb the deployment of strategic nuclear weapons by both Russia and the United States.
Under the treaty, the two countries agreed to limit their deployed strategic warheads, as well as the number of delivery systems, including land- and submarine-based missiles and long-range bombers.
It represents the last remaining legally binding arms control agreement between the two superpowers, a remnant of decades-long efforts to prevent nuclear escalation.
Speaking from Hanoi, Sergei Shoigu, Secretary of Russia’s Security Council, emphasized the urgency of a response from Washington.
“We have less than 100 days left before the expiry of New START. We are waiting for a response,” Shoigu told reporters, highlighting that Moscow’s proposal to maintain treaty limits for an additional year offers an opportunity to halt the “destructive movement” currently affecting nuclear arms control.
The Stakes Are High
The implications of letting New START lapse extend far beyond bilateral relations.
Russia and the United States collectively possess over 10,000 nuclear warheads, accounting for 87% of the world’s nuclear arsenal.
With China steadily expanding its nuclear capabilities, currently estimated at around 600 warheads, experts warn that the absence of a binding arms control framework could accelerate a new nuclear arms race.
Arms control agreements like New START were originally crafted to increase transparency, reduce miscalculations, and build confidence between rival nuclear powers.
Since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, these treaties have been a cornerstone of global stability.
However, most treaties between Moscow and Washington have deteriorated over the past decade due to geopolitical tensions, disagreements over NATO expansion, and Russia’s military actions in Ukraine.
International Perspectives on the Treaty’s Future
In September, President Putin proposed that Russia voluntarily maintain the New START limits for one year, a move that received cautious endorsement from former U.S. President Donald Trump in October.
Trump described the proposal as a “good idea,” reflecting bipartisan recognition of the treaty’s strategic value.
Experts and former negotiators have weighed in on the potential benefits of maintaining the treaty.
Rose Gottemoeller, former chief U.S. negotiator for New START, argued that continuing adherence would allow the United States more time to assess China’s nuclear modernization without simultaneously responding to additional Russian deployments.
“Implementing New START would buy crucial time for strategic planning and reduce the risk of escalation,” Gottemoeller noted.
The current U.S. administration has also acknowledged the importance of arms control in its National Security Strategy, emphasizing the need to “reestablish strategic stability with Russia.”
Analysts believe that renewed dialogue could help stabilize the global nuclear order, even as tensions between Moscow and Washington persist.
The Path Ahead
As the February deadline looms, both nations face critical decisions. Failure to extend or replace New START could lead to an unregulated arms race and undermine decades of diplomatic progress.
Military analysts warn that without the treaty’s verification mechanisms, transparency in nuclear deployments will decline, increasing the risk of miscalculations and inadvertent escalation.
In the meantime, Russia continues to publicly signal its willingness to cooperate.
Shoigu described the proposal as a chance to stop the “destructive movement” in nuclear arms control, signaling Moscow’s preference for stability despite broader geopolitical tensions.
For the United States, the decision carries both strategic and diplomatic weight, with implications for global security and the balance of nuclear power.
The clock is ticking on New START, and the world is watching closely.
With less than two months until the treaty’s expiration, the response from Washington will determine whether this crucial arms control framework continues to serve as a stabilizing force or whether the globe faces a renewed era of nuclear uncertainty.
As leaders weigh their options, one thing remains clear: the decisions made in the coming weeks will shape the trajectory of international security for years to come.
