The New START Treaty Violated All ‘America First’ Principles and It Needs to Die
Posted For: Rotorblade
President Trump said Thursday that the United States will allow the New START nuclear arms control treaty with Russia to expire. The treaty reached its expiration at midnight, ending the last remaining Cold War–era framework limiting the strategic nuclear arsenals of the two countries.
Announcing the decision on Truth Social, President Trump wrote:
The United States is the most powerful Country in the World. I completely rebuilt its Military in my First Term, including new and many refurbished nuclear weapons. I also added Space Force and now, continue to rebuild our Military at levels never seen before. We are even adding Battleships, which are 100 times more powerful than the ones that roamed the Seas during World War II — The Iowa, Missouri, Alabama, and others. I have stopped Nuclear Wars from breaking out across the World between Pakistan and India, Iran and Israel, and Russia and Ukraine. Rather than extend “NEW START” (A badly negotiated deal by the United States that, aside from everything else, is being grossly violated), we should have our Nuclear Experts work on a new, improved, and modernized Treaty that can last long into the future. Thank you for your attention to this matter! PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP
On February 5, 2026, the New START Treaty expired. Negotiated at a different time to meet a different challenge, New START no longer serves its purpose. Our desire to reduce global nuclear threats is genuine, but we will not accept terms that harm the United States or ignore…
— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) February 6, 2026
The New START treaty, signed in 2010, limited the number of deployed nuclear warheads and delivery systems maintained by both countries and included verification measures. Many foreign policy and arms control experts had urged its extension, arguing that it provided stability and transparency between the two nuclear powers.
Pope Leo XIV weighed in on X ahead of the expiration, urging that the agreement not be allowed to lapse without a replacement:
The expiration of the New START Treaty is presented as a tragic fact: nuclear ☢️threat draws nearer, America’s effective withdrawal could restart nuclear testing, pushing global escalation. But let’s be clear about what they really want.
They want us, just like in the 1990s, to… pic.twitter.com/CGE2HJaPj9
— Geopolitics by Sergey Mikheev 🇷🇺☦️ (@Miheev_Quotes) February 3, 2026
“The New START Treaty, which represented a significant step to limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons, expires tomorrow. I make an urgent appeal not to allow this instrument to lapse without seeking to ensure a concrete and effective follow-up. The current situation demands that everything possible be done to avert a new arms race. We must urgently replace the logic of fear and distrust with a shared ethic that can guide choices on behalf of the common good and make peace a heritage safeguarded by all.”
Russian commentators close to the Kremlin also reacted strongly to the possibility that the treaty would not be renewed, framing the agreement as an important symbol of strategic parity between Russia and the United States.
Some U.S. officials and analysts, however, argue that the treaty no longer reflects current geopolitical realities. They note that New START does not address China’s rapidly expanding nuclear arsenal and restricts certain aspects of U.S. strategic modernization, including limits on submarines, bombers, and land-based missiles, as well as constraints related to testing and verification of nuclear stockpiles.
Axios reported that discussions had taken place about continuing to observe the treaty informally even after its expiration. However, statements from the administration suggest a decision has been made to move beyond the framework of the original agreement.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote:
On February 5, 2026, the New START Treaty expired. Negotiated at a different time to meet a different challenge, New START no longer serves its purpose. Our desire to reduce global nuclear threats is genuine, but we will not accept terms that harm the United States or ignore noncompliance in the pursuit of an agreement for agreement’s sake. We will set high standards for all potential nuclear peers. And we will always negotiate from a position of strength.
Supporters of the decision argue that future arms control efforts should reflect today’s strategic environment, particularly the rise of China as a major nuclear power, rather than continue agreements designed primarily around U.S.–Russia parity. They contend that any new treaty should be broader, modernized, and better suited to current global threats rather than extending a framework negotiated for a different era.
About Post Author
