---
title: 'The New Weapons and the New Arms Race '
url: 'https://thediplomaticinsight.com/the-new-weapons-and-the-new-arms-race/'
author: 'Sher Ali Kakar'
date: '2026-01-19T14:12:19+05:00'
categories:
  - 'OpEd'
---

# The New Weapons and the New Arms Race 

The year 2025 witnessed heightened geopolitical tensions among the major powers—the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China. These powers increasingly prioritized nuclear modernization, taking away hope for arms control and the ultimate goal of disarmament. These nuclear rivals have indulged in an unending new arms race with the risk of a cascading vertical proliferation, as others might follow suit because of the increasing security dilemma between the rivals. 

Unlike in the previous ages, when major powers managed to sign bilateral treaties and agreed on global frameworks to prevent other states from acquiring nuclear capabilities, the contemporary nuclear age is marked by an increased geopolitical competition and competing strategies of major powers, which are leading to cascading downward effects, making the global frameworks even more complicated. 

As the US-Russia talks on extending the New START agreement dwindles, and China continues to show unwillingness to join President Trump`s proposed multilateral negotiations alongside the US and Russia, Washington is prioritizing nuclear modernization to secure its strategic interests and geopolitical goals. Amidst the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, prospects for US-Russia cooperation are improbable. 

Moscow’s growing threat perceptions from the US and its European allies, along with the differing approaches these two powers have adopted in negotiating critical matters, are resulting in a lack of cooperation and an inability to reach an agreement. For Russia, any negotiation with the US is worthless without taking into account the broader geopolitical and military-strategic context. 

Similarly, China`s nuclear forces are quantitatively lower than those of the US, aside from differences in the regional security environment and nuclear policies. Therefore, Beijing is unwilling to join President Trump`s proposed multilateral negotiations, as they may not suit China`s vital security interests. For this reason, China has clearly declared that such negotiations are “unreasonable and unrealistic.”

The [white paper](https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xw/wjbxw/202511/t20251127_11761653.html) on arms control released by China in November 2025, clearly mentions that countries having the largest nuclear arsenal should fulfill their responsibility for nuclear disarmament and continue to make significant and substantive reductions in their nuclear arsenals in their nuclear arsenals in a verifiable, irreversible, and legally-binding manner to create the conditions for complete and thorough nuclear disarmament. This is clear evidence of the difference in approaches to arms control between China and the West. 

**Read More: [Russia Presses US on New START Extension Before February Deadline](https://thediplomaticinsight.com/russia-presses-us-on-new-start-extension/)**

For the US, the nuclear modernization by China and Russia is a direct threat to its strategic interests. Estimations by the [ Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists](https://thebulletin.org/premium/2025-05/russian-nuclear-weapons-2025/), suggest that Russia currently possesses a stockpile of about 4,300 nuclear warheads, including 1,150 retired but still intact warheads awaiting dismantlement, making a total inventory of some 5,459 warheads. Additionally, Russia`s low threshold for nuclear use is perceived by the US as a direct challenge to its deterrence credibility. 

Moscow de-ratified the CTBT in 2023 and has announced  `reciprocal measures` in response to President Trump`s recent statement on nuclear testing of a “similar kind.  The US is concerned about China`s expanding nuclear arsenal, which, reportedly, with 600  may reach 1000 by 2030, and continue onwards.  China`s development of road-mobile missiles, ballistic missile submarines (SLBMs), and hypersonic glide vehicles is perceived by the US as a signal of ambition to assert military dominance in what the US and its allies refer to as the Indo-Pacific region.

 In the midst of these developments, a recently released US [National Security](https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-National-Security-Strategy.pdf) Document embraces a most robust, credible, and modern nuclear deterrent, besides next-generation missile defenses, including a Golden Dome for the American homeland, to protect the American people, American assets overseas, and American allies. 

The United Kingdom (UK) and France are also at par with other great powers in this new race for modernization and upgradation. Recently, the UK Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced plans to invest £15bn ($20.25bn) towards its deterrence at sea. The government also pledged to expand its conventionally armed and nuclear-powered submarine fleet under the trilateral AUKUS pact. The UK appears to be prioritizing quantitative hedge by constructing up to 12 additional SSN-AUKUS submarines, representing a significant increase in its undersea fleet. 

Similarly, France is engaged in a significant modernization of its ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, submarines, aircraft, and nuclear industrial complex. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists estimates suggest that France currently possesses an arsenal of approximately 290 warheads, with some 80 retired warheads awaiting dismantlement, making a total inventory of roughly 370 nuclear warheads. 

Even though major powers remain committed to preventing arms races and achieving the ultimate goal of disarmament, their differing geopolitical and strategic interests, as well as their varied approaches to the global arms control regime, are the primary challenges. The increased arms race amongst the major powers recalls the first nuclear age, which saw a rapid chain reaction among them. 

However, unlike the first nuclear age, in which these powers agreed to prevent others from acquiring arms, the new age is more uncertain because their geopolitical interests allow other states to acquire new weapons, thus intensifying security dilemmas. The Canada-India uranium deal, which is set to be finalized for 10 years, is the latest case in point illustrating how major powers undermine global frameworks to advance their geopolitical interests. 

 

 

**The views presented in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Diplomatic Insight.*