A decade of deteriorating relations between the United States and its main nuclear adversaries has dimmed prospects for disarmament diplomacy.
China, Russia, and the United States are now at the dawn of a dangerous era of unconstrained nuclear competition, as Daryl Kimball stated in his story "Does the United States Need More Nuclear Weapons?" Concern in US national security circles about Chinese and Russian nuclear capabilities has grown since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine effectively shut down US-Russian dialog on nuclear weapons. Russia has rejected the White House proposal to negotiate a new nuclear arms control framework to replace the New START treaty, which expires on February 5, 2026. In addition, China has declined US offers to continue bilateral discussions on reducing the nuclear risks.
The US intelligence community forecasts that China could amass as many as 1,000 nuclear weapons by 2030, with several hundred of them deployed on a more significant force of intercontinental ballistic missiles, some members of the nuclear weapons establishment, leading members of Congress, and Biden administration officials have suggested that the massive US arsenal may not be sufficient to deter our adversaries. China is currently estimated to have some 500 nuclear weapons and 310 long-range, nuclear-armed ballistic missiles.
Proposals have been advanced to expand the US nuclear modernization program to provide the US with the capability and flexibility to deploy more strategic nuclear weapons on more delivery systems and field new types of theater-range nuclear weapons. Some experts argue that the US should prepare to build up its deployed nuclear force at some unspecified future time, while others suggest that such efforts should begin now.
Kimball stated what a detriment the current arms race is to our security: "An expansion of Russian and US deployed nuclear forces would be unnecessary, counterproductive, and expensive for both sides. Adding more nuclear warheads to missiles, fielding more nuclear-capable bombers, or deploying nuclear-armed cruise missiles would not enhance deterrence capabilities or improve security. If one side were to break out of the New START limits, the other side could match the increase and further stimulate China's effort to increase its strategic nuclear force so as to maintain an assured retaliatory strike capability."
The US is estimated to have roughly 3,700 warheads in its active arsenal. This includes 1,670 thermonuclear warheads deployed on 660 powerful long-range missiles on land and at sea or available for delivery on strategic bombers. There are also another 100 tactical nuclear bombs that can be delivered on shorter-range aircraft. The use of a fraction of these weapons, many primed for launch within minutes, would lead to mass destruction on an unprecedented global scale, as stated by Kimball.
Kimball also stated that more nuclear weapons would not improve the US's capability to deter nuclear attack. Significant increases in the US-deployed nuclear arsenal would undermine global security by making the existing balance of nuclear terror more unpredictable. They would set into motion a counterproductive, costly action-reaction cycle of nuclear competition.
The Congressional Commission on US Strategic Posture recently acknowledged the value of arms control to our security, a credit to the Commission. For more than 50 years, US presidents of both parties have recognized the value of nuclear arms control to constrain adversary capabilities that can threaten the US, its allies, and the world. The Biden administration's 2022 Nuclear Posture Review stated that "[m]utual, verifiable nuclear arms control offers the most effective, durable and responsible path to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our strategy and prevent their use."
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan recently visited China-- the first US national security advisor visit in eight years-- to try to keep diplomatic channels open. He held unexpected talks with top Chinese leader Xi Jinping and landed a rare meeting with China's most senior military officer, General Zhang Youxia. The three-day visit prepared the way for a phone call between President Joe Biden and Mr. Xi in the coming weeks and a possible in-person meeting later this year.
Presidential Candidate and Vice President Kamala Harris has said she favors diplomacy with China in order to manage the relationship. Maybe Sulivan's trip will lead to more high-level diplomacy and a cooling of tensions. Maybe some nuclear arms control and space arms control deals will keep the current tensions within certain boundaries. The promotion of authoritarian and totalitarian systems by the Russia-China orbit will continue to be a problem, but perhaps we can turn down the heat for now. In time, the world's powers may establish a sense of order on all sorts of issues outside of arms control. It could be something like the four policemen that President Franklin Roosevelt envisioned in World War II. This could happen in the United Nations or a successor organization. The big question remains - how long will authoritarian and totalitarian systems continue to export their way of life?
Jason Sibert is the Lead Writer of the Peace Economy Project
