There is no worse time for US-Russia nuclear deal expires which dates back to 2010. Perhaps it is not important, and what is relevant is the change in geopolitics that is taking place. Anyway, Russia already abandoned it in February 2023in the middle of the war in Ukraine, although it is the February 5, 2026 when it expires.
It is the date when stability becomes somewhat more orphaned. Expires on Treaty New Start (STAT III)the last great agreement that puts legal and verifiable limits on the strategic arsenals of the United States and Russia.
If it expires without a replacement, the world enters a terrain it has not seen since the Cold War: without a binding framework that forces both powers to show charts, exchange data and accept inspections.
In theory, the treaty limited each party to 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads and 700 deployed delivery systems (intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched missiles and bombers). In practice, this “ceiling” worked because there was verification. And therein lies the problem: since 2023, the inspection regime and much of the transparency had already been affected.
What changes when the treaty disappears
The biggest impact is not that someone “presses a button” the next day, but that the control routine that reduces misunderstandings and arms races is broken.
- Goodbye to verification: New START included regular on-site inspections and notifications. With the bilateral relationship at a minimum, that architecture has been fading, and without a treaty there is no obligation to recover transparency.
- More room to “upload” warheads without manufacturing thousands of new ones: Both Washington and Moscow could increase the number of warheads deployed by “re-loading” missiles with more warheads (a technical capability that exists in several systems), even without the total weapons in inventory changing much. It’s the type of movement that fuels distrust: if you don’t see, you assume the worst.
- Domino effect on global stability and the NPT: when the last containment agreement between the two largest nuclear powers falls, the signal to the rest is toxic: the argument that the nuclear powers “comply” with the spirit of disarmament of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Do you want to renew it? Putin offers one year; Trump eyes another deal
In recent weeks, Moscow has repeated the idea of (informally) maintaining the limits for an additional time. , he Kremlin has said it awaits Washington’s response to an informal one-year extension proposal. to gain negotiation margin.
In Washington, the outlook is more uncertain. that President Donald Trump has shown no clear intention to renew the treaty as it stands and has hinted that he would prefer a “better” or broader deal.
The reading is that, without inspections, a political promise is worth little: the point of a treaty is to be able to verify.
How many warheads are there today: the numbers used by reference sources
Here it is convenient to separate two plans: what is deployed (what is assembled and ready in operational forces) and the total arsenal (includes stored and, according to methodology, withdrawals pending dismantling).
And for the global context: SIPRI estimates 12,241 warheads in the world (January 2025), with 3,912 deployed. Russia and the US concentrate around 90% of the total.
A new agreement that includes China?
The idea of a deal that brings China on board appears again and again in Washington, especially as Beijing is expanding its arsenal and modernizing its triad.
The problem is political and arithmetic: China refuses to sit within a framework of symmetrical limits as long as its arsenal is much lower than that of the other two powers. That’s their usual public line, echoed by Chinese spokespersons according to the Arms Control Association.
Besides, The Pentagon has once again projected that China which puts extra pressure on the American debate over whether to “freeze” or “expand” forces.
