NewKerala.com

US Calls for New Nuclear Arms Control Era as New START Expires

The United States has called for a new, multilateral framework for nuclear arms control following the expiration of the New START treaty with Russia. Secretary of State Marco Rubio argues that bilateral treaties are obsolete and must now account for China's rapid and opaque nuclear arsenal expansion. He outlined principles for future negotiations, including rejecting purely bilateral approaches and not accepting agreements that overlook violations. While acknowledging the difficulty of multi-power negotiations, Rubio emphasized the necessity of the effort to reduce global nuclear threats.

Key Points: US Seeks New Nuclear Arms Control Framework Post-New START

  • New START treaty has expired
  • US calls for multilateral framework
  • China's nuclear buildup a key concern
  • Future deals must address Russia and China
  • US will maintain nuclear deterrent
3 min read

US calls for new nuclear arms control era

Secretary Marco Rubio outlines US push for multilateral nuclear arms control involving Russia and China after New START treaty expiration.

"A new era requires a new approach. - Marco Rubio"

Washington, Feb 6

The United States on Friday called for a new framework for nuclear arms control involving multiple powers, arguing that the expiration of the New START treaty marks the end of a Cold War-era model no longer suited to current global threats.

In an essay released a day after New START formally expired, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said past arms control agreements helped make the United States safer but warned that bilateral treaties with Russia no longer reflect today's strategic realities.

"Everything has its season, though, and yesterday, New START expired," Rubio wrote, rejecting claims that the treaty's end signals a US-driven arms race. He noted that Russia stopped implementing the agreement in 2023 "after flouting its terms for years".

"A treaty requires at least two parties," Rubio wrote, adding that the United States faced a choice between binding itself unilaterally or recognising that "a new era requires a new approach".

Rubio said future arms control must account for a changing nuclear balance, particularly China's rapid buildup. "China's rapid and opaque expansion of its nuclear arsenal since New START entered into force has rendered past models of arms control... obsolete," he wrote on Substack.

According to Rubio, China has expanded its nuclear stockpile from "the low 200s to more than 600" since 2020 and is "on pace to have more than 1,000 warheads by 2030". Any agreement that ignores China's buildup, he warned, would leave the United States and its allies "less safe".

The Secretary said President Donald Trump has been "clear, consistent, and unequivocal" that future arms control must address both Russia and China as nuclear peers.

Rubio said Washington formally presented its approach in Geneva, calling for multilateral nuclear arms control and strategic stability talks. He outlined three guiding principles, beginning with rejecting arms control as a purely bilateral issue.

"Other countries have a responsibility to help ensure strategic stability, none more so than China," he wrote.

Rubio also said the United States would not accept agreements that overlook violations. "We will not accept terms that harm the United States or ignore noncompliance in the pursuit of a future agreement," he said.

At the same time, he emphasised deterrence. "We will maintain a robust, credible, and modernised nuclear deterrent," Rubio wrote, while pursuing the President's stated goal of reducing global nuclear threats.

Acknowledging that negotiations could take years, Rubio said past treaties required decades of groundwork and were negotiated between two powers, not three or more. Still, he argued the effort is necessary.

"Just because something is hard does not mean we should not pursue it or settle for less," Rubio wrote, adding that difficult deals are often "the only ones worth having".

He said the United States hopes others will join the effort to reduce nuclear dangers "in reality, not merely on paper".

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
Rubio makes a fair point about needing a new approach, but the tone feels a bit like blaming Russia for the treaty's end. Both sides share responsibility. As an Indian, I hope any new "multilateral" talks genuinely include voices beyond just the US, Russia, and China. What about the nuclear concerns of other nations? 🤔
R
Rohit P
China's opaque expansion is the real worry. From 200 to 1000 warheads in a decade? That's alarming for the whole region, including us. The US calling them out is necessary. India must watch this space closely and ensure its own security interests are not compromised in any new great power deal.
S
Sarah B
While the intent for a new framework is good, the article mentions this could take "decades". In the meantime, what happens? The world can't afford a renewed arms race. The principles sound strong on paper – no overlooking violations, robust deterrence – but the path to getting all major powers to agree seems incredibly difficult.
V
Vikram M
Finally, someone is talking sense! The Cold War model is dead. You can't have arms control while ignoring the world's second-largest economy and its massive military modernization. India should support this push for a more inclusive framework. Our No First Use policy is a model of responsibility others should follow.
K
Karthik V
I have a respectful criticism. The US is correct to involve China, but the language feels like it's setting the stage for a new Cold War, just with two adversaries instead of one. The goal should be genuine de-escalation and trust-building, not just creating a new bloc to contain China. The world

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50