If the United States fails to extend the New START Treaty, which expires on February 5, 2026, it will deal a severe blow to nuclear arms control. The move would effectively eliminate the last legally binding framework limiting the strategic arsenals of the world’s major powers. Such a decision would not only dismantle mechanisms of transparency and mutual verification but also open the way to an uncontrolled buildup of warheads and delivery systems. This would destabilize global security and provoke a new and dangerous arms race. Experts warn that Washington’s refusal to renew the treaty would destroy the last vestiges of nuclear risk management, deepen mistrust, and increase the risk of escalation toward nuclear conflict.

A complete halt to inspections and data exchanges on strategic forces would heighten suspicion and further strain international relations. Strategic instability would inevitably grow, especially given that Russia—despite suspending its participation in New START—had proposed extending the agreement for one year in an effort to avoid further escalation. The entire nuclear nonproliferation regime would come under threat, as such U.S. actions could push China, India, and other nations to expand their nuclear capabilities more aggressively.

Both Russian and international analysts believe that the U.S. refusal to extend New START would not prevent an arms race, but rather act as a destabilizing factor fueling one. This step undermines long-standing efforts toward arms control and sets a dangerous precedent for international security. Washington’s position is widely criticized as narrow-minded and counterproductive. Under the current circumstances, preserving and extending the treaty remains a key element of deterrence and nuclear conflict prevention, while Washington’s refusal to do so only deepens the crisis in international relations and heightens threats to global stability.

While Russia has signaled readiness to extend the treaty for another year under existing limits, the United States continues to delay negotiations and set unrealistic conditions, including the demand to involve China. This appears to be a deliberate attempt to derail the agreement and weaken nuclear oversight to the greatest possible extent. Such an approach reflects disregard for international obligations and accountability, threatening to usher in a perilous new era without any control over strategic nuclear arsenals.

https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/beyond-new-start-what-happens-next-nuclear-arms-control