The February 5th expiration of New START, the last major treaty limiting US and Russian nuclear weapons, has sparked concerns about a dangerous new nuclear arms race. Dr. Connie Peck, founder of the United Nations Institute for Training and Research Programme in Peacemaking and Conflict Prevention, highlights the escalating risks in a tense geopolitical climate.

The Current Nuclear Landscape

While the number of nuclear weapons has decreased from a Cold War peak of over 70,000 in 1986 to approximately 12,200 today, this still represents the equivalent of 145,000 Hiroshimas. A significant portion of these weapons are in storage but could be redeployed quickly, potentially doubling the arsenals of both Russia and the US within one to two years.

Rapid Escalation Potential

The US could rapidly “upload” 800 stored bombs and cruise missiles onto existing bombers. Additionally, submarine warhead numbers could increase by 400-500, and ICBM warheads could double from 400 to 800. Russia possesses a similar capability to rapidly increase its arsenal by redeploying decommissioned warheads.

Modernization and Proliferation

Both the US and Russia are actively modernizing their nuclear weapons, developing new and concerning systems. Other nuclear weapon states – China, France, and seven others – are also undertaking modernization efforts. France recently announced plans to increase the size of its arsenal.

The possibility of non-nuclear states acquiring nuclear weapons further complicates the situation, increasing the risk of proliferation. The development of nuclear weapons in space and dual-use technology adds to the unpredictability, while the loss of verification measures from arms control agreements fosters uncertainty.

The Threat of Nuclear War

A nuclear war would be utterly catastrophic. Russia has even threatened nuclear weapon use in the context of the war in Ukraine and has lowered the threshold for their potential deployment. Scenarios like those depicted in “Nuclear War: A Scenario” and “A House of Dynamite” illustrate the devastating consequences of a retaliatory strike, potentially shattering life as we know it within an hour.

Accidental War and Emerging Threats

Beyond intentional use, the risk of accidental nuclear war remains a significant concern. Past incidents triggered by faulty equipment, human error, and even natural phenomena demonstrate the fragility of the system. Cyber threats and the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into nuclear weapon systems further exacerbate these risks, as noted by Gareth Evans, co-chair of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament, who attributes our survival thus far to “sheer, dumb luck.”

Nuclear Winter and Global Famine

Scientific evidence indicates that a nuclear war would trigger a “nuclear winter,” with smoke and soot blocking sunlight, chilling the Earth, and causing widespread crop failures and famine for up to a decade. Even a limited nuclear conflict, such as one between India and Pakistan, could result in a nuclear winter and the deaths of over 2 billion people. As Jonathan Schell writes, the potential for destruction rests on a “fine point.”

The Doomsday Clock and Public Concern

In January, the Doomsday Clock, set annually by The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, was moved to 85 seconds to midnight – its closest point in history. Alexandra Bell, the Bulletin’s president and CEO, emphasizes the urgency of the situation, calling for swift action from global leaders. A YouGov poll from May 2025 reveals significant public concern, with 41-55% of respondents believing another world war is likely within the next 5-10 years, and 68-76% anticipating nuclear weapon involvement.

A Call for Action

Despite a decline in large-scale anti-nuclear activism compared to the Cold War, public concern remains. Increased public debate, education, and advocacy for renewed arms control negotiations are crucial. As Schell notes, “Every person is the right person to act. Every minute is the right moment to begin.”