Quick Read
- Putin offered a one-year extension to New START nuclear warhead limits if the US reciprocates.
- New START is the last major arms reduction treaty between the US and Russia, limiting deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 each.
- Inspections under the treaty have been suspended since the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Russia froze formal participation in 2023 but continued to follow treaty limits voluntarily.
- Arms control talks between the US and Russia have stalled amid tensions over Ukraine and missile defense plans.
Russia Seeks to Extend New START Nuclear Limits With the US
As the clock ticks down to February 2026, when the New START treaty between the United States and Russia is set to expire, the specter of a new strategic arms race looms large. On Monday, President Vladimir Putin stepped into the spotlight, proposing a one-year extension of the treaty’s nuclear warhead limits—on the crucial condition that Washington reciprocates.
The New START treaty, inked in 2010, stands as the final bulwark against unchecked nuclear proliferation between the world’s two largest atomic powers. It restricts both sides to a maximum of 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads, a significant reduction from earlier limits. The treaty also included provisions for on-site inspections of nuclear arsenals, a transparency measure that was suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic and has yet to resume.
Strategic Calculus: Putin’s Position and Motivations
“Fully abandoning the legacy of this agreement would be, from many perspectives, a mistaken and short-sighted step,” Putin stated during a televised meeting, his words underscoring the gravity of the moment. He emphasized Russia’s willingness to uphold the central quantitative limitations of New START for one year after its expiration, provided the United States matches this commitment and refrains from actions that could undermine the delicate balance of deterrence.
This offer arrives amid fractured relations and deep mistrust between Moscow and Washington, exacerbated by the ongoing Ukraine conflict. Talks on extending the treaty have faltered, and both nations have increasingly accused each other of posturing. Russia, while freezing its participation in New START in 2023, has continued to voluntarily abide by its warhead limits—a gesture that signals both caution and resolve.
Nuclear Inspections and Transparency: What’s Missing?
Notably absent from Putin’s proposal is any mention of resuming the suspended on-site inspections, once a cornerstone of the agreement’s credibility. These inspections, which allowed each side to verify the other’s compliance, have remained on hold since the pandemic. Their absence leaves a gap in mutual trust and transparency, raising concerns among arms control experts about the future of verification.
Heloise Fayet, a research fellow at the French Institute of International Relations, interprets Putin’s move as an effort to “control the narrative” in the wake of US President Donald Trump’s push for new denuclearization talks with both Russia and China. She links the timing of the offer to Trump’s ambitious plans for a nationwide air-defense shield, nicknamed the “Golden Dome.” Russia, Fayet suggests, sees such US defenses as a threat to the strategic balance, implying that if the Golden Dome project advances, Moscow may abandon all limitations under New START.
From INF to Comprehensive Test Ban: The Erosion of Arms Control
The proposal arrives in a landscape marked by the steady unraveling of nuclear arms agreements. In 2019, the US and Russia withdrew from the landmark Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, a pillar of Cold War-era stability that had eliminated an entire class of missiles. More recently, Putin signed a law revoking Russia’s ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, though Moscow maintains a moratorium on atomic testing.
Since sending troops into Ukraine in February 2022, Russia has faced accusations of nuclear saber-rattling. Days after launching the assault, Putin placed his nuclear forces on high alert. In a further shift, he signed a decree last year lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons—a move that unsettled observers and heightened fears of miscalculation.
US Response and Global Implications
The American response has been cautious. While President Trump has spoken of relocating nuclear submarines in response to provocative statements from Russian officials, substantive talks on nuclear issues have remained elusive. Both nations, together controlling more than 80 percent of the world’s nuclear warheads, have seen their non-proliferation dialogue stall, even as the need for stability grows ever more urgent.
With the New START treaty’s expiration looming, the international community faces a pivotal moment. If both sides allow the agreement to lapse, the world could witness a rapid escalation in nuclear stockpiles and a breakdown of the existing balance of deterrence. The absence of verification mechanisms and the erosion of trust compound these risks, making Putin’s proposal, limited though it may be, a critical juncture in the ongoing nuclear narrative.
The Stakes: Risk, Rhetoric, and the Path Forward
The shadow of a new arms race hangs heavy over the current standoff. Without clear commitment from both Washington and Moscow, the fragile architecture of arms control could collapse, leaving the world less safe. The interplay between rhetoric—Putin’s calculated offer, Trump’s strategic posturing—and real policy choices will shape the coming months.
As the New START agreement teeters on the edge, the question is not just whether the limits will be extended, but whether both sides can find a way back to substantive dialogue and mutual verification. The stakes are nothing less than global security.
Putin’s one-year extension offer is less a breakthrough than a pause—a brief moment to reconsider the trajectory of nuclear diplomacy. Without renewed trust and transparent verification, the world remains one misstep away from a new era of strategic uncertainty.