Is the world in a new nuclear arms race?
Rise in arms spending heralds a dangerous new era


The nuclear nightmares of the Cold War are back. The world's nine nuclear-armed nations — including the United States, Russia and China — "spent a combined total of $91.4 billion on their arsenals in 2023," said The Associated Press, a surge of weapons building and modernization that makes international conflicts much more fraught with apocalyptic danger. "We have not seen nuclear weapons playing such a prominent role in international relations since the Cold War," said Wilfred Wan of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
That means a lot more saber-rattling. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg is flexing the alliance's "nuclear muscles," Politico said, with suggestions it should deploy nuclear weapons more widely to deter threats from Russia, China and North Korea. The rise of China's nuclear program, he said, is particularly alarming. "NATO may face something that it has never faced before, and that is two nuclear-powered potential adversaries — China and Russia." A new arms race is on.
What did the commentators say?
"The U.S. needs more nukes," Hal Brands said at Bloomberg. President Joe Biden in 2021 briefly considered a "no first use" policy for America's nuclear arsenal, but "America's adversaries don't share the dream of a nuclear-free world." China doubled the size of its own arsenal in recent years, capable of striking at U.S. bases — and allies — in the Pacific. The U.S. has always prioritized a "nuclear advantage" over its rivals, said Brands. Building more weapons "is vital to the credibility of America's global defense posture."
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
"More warheads will not make us safer," Robert Rust said at the Union of Concerned Scientists blog. We already learned during the Cold War that "any quantitative advantage" the U.S. might gain by building more nukes "will inevitably evaporate." The other guys will catch up quickly. But it would be expensive — a problem when the U.S. defense budget already threatens to exceed $1 trillion a year. A new nuclear arms race "will have no winners, only losers."
What next?
Stoltenberg's comments drew backlash from Russia, Reuters said. "This is nothing but another escalation of tension," said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov. And NATO tried to walk back the notion that it might deploy nuclear arms more widely. "We have an ongoing modernization program to replace legacy weapons and aircraft," a spokesperson said. "Beyond that, there are no significant changes to our nuclear deterrent."
"Ideally, more aggressive U.S. diplomacy might bring China to the table for tripartite arms talks with Russia and the United States," said The Washington Post. But the prospects for such talks — or an agreement to put limits on a new arms race — "are dim." But Presidents Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin don't show the same "flexibility or pragmatism" offered by predecessors like Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, who started the U.S. and Russia on the path of reducing their nuclear stockpiles. Instead, China and Russia now seem to have a "desire for heightened geopolitical struggle." That's the dilemma the United States faces now. "Diplomacy takes two to tango, or, in this case, three."
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a writer with 30 years of newspaper and online journalism experience. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic and The Kansas City Star. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
Five key questions about the Gaza peace deal
The Explainer Many ‘unresolved hurdles’ remain before Donald Trump’s 20-point plan can get the go-ahead
-
See the Northern Lights from these bucket list destinations
The Week Recommends The dazzling displays can be spotted across Iceland, Sweden and parts of Canada
-
Sudoku hard: October 7, 2025
The Week's daily hard sudoku puzzle
-
Russia: already at war with Europe?
Talking Point As Kremlin begins ‘cranking up attacks’ on Ukraine’s European allies, questions about future action remain unanswered
-
Why is this government shutdown so consequential?
Today's Big Question Federal employee layoffs could be in the thousands
-
TikTok: A little help from Trump’s friends
Feature Trump’s new TikTok deal would hand the app over to 'his billionaire allies,' ignoring national security concerns
-
‘ExxonMobil made the right call’
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Ukraine: Trump’s latest stalling tactic
Feature Trump plans to impose sanctions on Russia only if all 31 NATO states join in and agree to ban Russian oil imports
-
UN panel finds Israeli genocide in Gaza
Speed Read The report found that Israeli leaders had committed ‘four of the five “genocidal acts”’ prohibited under the U.N. Genocide Convention
-
China: Xi seeks to fill America’s void
Feature Trump’s tariffs are pushing nations eastward as Xi Jinping focuses on strengthening ties with global leaders
-
Russian drone tests Romania as Trump spins
Speed Read Trump is ‘resisting congressional plans to impose newer and tougher penalties on Russia’s energy sector’