Peace in Crosshairs: Trump Lets Nuclear Arms Treaty with Russia Expire

Russia and the United States are no longer bound by any formal agreement to restrict themselves against nuclear arsenal buildup and deployment as the last treaty between the two countries placing such limits expired earlier this month. Are the U.S. and Russia reentering a nuclear arsenal race? Does it leave the world less safe? And how does it play into Donald Trump’s campaign promise to end wars and establish peace around the world?

On February 5, the New START treaty between Russia and the United States expired. It was the last formal agreement between the two nuclear super powers to put restrictions on buildup and deployment of nuclear arsenal by each side. Negotiated and signed in 2010 by then presidents of the two countries – Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev – the New START treaty put limits on the number of certain nuclear warheads, missiles, and bombers on each side. In 2021, the Biden administration renewed the treaty for 5 years.

Ahead of the treaty’s expiration, Russia reached out to the Trump administration in September 2025 to extend the treaty for another year. Antiwar.com blogged about a poll (February 1) by ReThink Media and the Nuclear Threat Initiative, which found that a vast majority of Americans supported the extension of the treaty. The poll results showed that 86% of all Americans and 87% of Republican voters included in the poll supported accepting Russia’s offer of extending the treaty. The blog wrote:

Even more respondents, 91%, agreed that the US should negotiate a new deal with Russia to maintain current nuclear limits or further reduce both countries’ nuclear weapons.

The obvious concern of these supporting the treaty is peace through mutual respect and understanding, which is the conviction of the majority that wants global peace – not counting the global warmongers benefitting from the war industry. However, President Trump chose to let the treaty go without accepting Russia’s offer to renew it.

Singapore-based news channel CNA aired comments of a few security analysts from different parts of the world, all of them expressing concern over the treaty’s expiration and its negative implications for global peace and security.

Political analyst Ray McGovern, a former CIA official, expressed his disappointment at the lack of will in the Trump admin to renew the treaty and called it a big victory for the 1% of arms profiteers while millions of Americans are oblivious to it.

For media and commentators, Trump’s decision to drop the extension offer by Russia came as a surprise because in July 2025, it was Trump himself who supported the treaty and said it was not something that you want to expire. Last month, however, the same American President told the New York Times, “If it expires, it expires. We’ll do a better agreement.” What changed and why?

Donald Trump is not a stranger to abrupt change of course in policy matters. But the fact that global peace and security are at stake here makes this apparent U-turn not only puzzling but quite worrying. With a war brewing up in the Middle East and the Trump administration’s direct escalation toward it while also making aggressive moves in the Caribbean and with no sign of peace between Russia and Ukraine, Trump’s campaign promise of peace appears more of rhetoric than policy.

It’s important to remember the powerful and influential Pentagon’s role in shaping the foreign policy of any administration. Regarding the now-expired nuclear arms treaty with Russia, the Washington Examiner (February 4) wrote that a recent Pentagon report expressed concern over China’s massive raise in nuclear stockpiles. The story cited from Pentagon’s report to the Congress:

“Beijing continues to demonstrate no appetite for pursuing such measures or more comprehensive arms control discussions.”

Apparently, this has influenced Trump from renewing the treaty with Russia so that a new treaty can rope China in as well. But until such a treaty was negotiated, renewing the existing one was a viable option and could be a persuading factor for China to follow suit on the commitment of the two super powers to an important cause.