Three Scorpions: A New Nuclear Arms Race?
SALT to New START | The Third Scorpion | Cost Burden of Nuclear Arsenals
Dear BWR Shoeshiners and Barbers!
IMPORTANT NOTICE(S): Please be aware that some e-mail servers (G-mail in particular) may truncate the BWR newsletter. To avoid this problem, please read BWR on the Substack platform to enjoy the full newsletter.
Follow BWR’s daily posts on the Blue Sky platform for daily updates and posts.
In last week’s BWR, I discussed the Soviet and Russian dominance in the chess world. Why does Russia no longer dominate the chess world as the Soviet Union did? The main culprit is not what one might think.
In this week’s BWR, I discuss the expiration of the New START Treaty and the emerging Chinese nuclear force. Why was it allowed to expire, and are we on the cusp of a new nuclear arms race?
Takeaways
Milestone—For the first time since 1991, the way Russian-US nuclear arms reduction treaties have been negotiated and the signatories are in question. Russian non-compliance with New START and the US insistence that China become a signatory to a new treaty are changing the negotiating dynamics and the treaty signatories. It remains to be seen whether a trilateral agreement – the US, Russia, and China – can be reached.
Nuclear Arms Race 2.0—China is determined to reach nuclear parity with the US and Russia. Will this goal trigger a new nuclear arms race? Russia is not in a position to allocate resources toward a nuclear arms race.
SALT to New START
The US-Russia New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), signed by US President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in 2011, expired on 5 February 2026. In 2021, the Biden Administration granted New START a one-time five-year extension. New START traces its roots to the historic START I, the first nuclear arms treaty designed to reduce the stockpile of nuclear warheads and limit the number of delivery platforms: the nuclear triad of land (missiles and silos), sea (submarines), and air (bombers). Prior to START I, US-Soviet nuclear arms treaties such as SALT I and SALT II were designed to limit the growth of nuclear warheads rather than reduce the stockpile. In 1991, when START I was signed, the US and the Soviet Union each maintained a stockpile of approximately 12,000 nuclear warheads. By 2001, that number had been reduced to approximately 8,000 warheads and 2,000 delivery platforms. START I called for reductions to 6,000 and 1,600 warheads and nuclear-capable delivery platforms, respectively. Excess warheads and delivery platforms were dismantled and destroyed.
Today, the US and Russia each maintain approximately 5,500 warheads, representing an 80% reduction from 1991. Notably, while the US and Russia are at relative parity in terms of nuclear weapons covered by New START, Russia has ten times as many low-yield tactical nuclear weapons as the US. These weapons are not covered by New START, and previous US presidential administrations, including the current US administration, have raised the issue of including them in a new arms reduction agreement. Another problem that has weakened New START has been Russian noncompliance with the treaty. In February 2023, Russia formally suspended participation in New START, an action the US determined to be legally invalid. Since September 2021, Russia has refused 18 on-site verification inspections and the sharing of ICBM/SLBM test data. On-site verification inspections and the sharing of missile data are required elements of the treaty.
In September 2025, the Kremlin proposed a voluntary, reciprocal commitment to observe the nuclear caps in the agreement after its expiration. Although US President Trump expressed interest in doing so, no deal materialized before its expiration.
The Third Scorpion
More than seventy years ago, the father of the atomic bomb, J. Robert Oppenheimer, described the US and Soviet Union possession of nuclear weapons as,
“Two scorpions in a bottle, each capable of killing the other, but only at the risk of his own life.”
Arguably, a third nuclear power is quickly emerging – China. Over the past three decades, China has expanded its nuclear warhead stockpile from 200 in 2001 to 600 in 2025. In the last two years, China has accelerated production, adding more than 100 warheads per year, and is expected to have more than 1,000 by 2030. With this rapid increase in warheads, China is also building a formidable nuclear delivery system, a trend that has raised concerns in the US.
As a result, the US has been proposing a trilateral nuclear reduction agreement – the US, Russia, and China; a proposal that received a cool reception in Beijing. Chinese officials argue that the US and Russia should reduce their nuclear arsenals before lesser nuclear powers like China join any nuclear reduction agreement. China is not necessarily wrong in its assessment. The US and Russia hold more than 90% of the world’s nuclear arsenal. Will a trilateral agreement lead to a nuclear arsenal reduction equal to China’s? No. A trilateral agreement will likely happen when, not if, China reaches nuclear parity with the US and Russia.
While the Kremlin has never publicly expressed concern about China’s growing nuclear arsenal, there is evidence that Russian government officials, particularly in the military and security services, are privately concerned. The Financial Times published an article about leaked Russian military documents outlining contingency plans for the use of tactical nuclear weapons against China in the event of an invasion of the sparsely populated Russian Far East and Siberia, lands acquired by the Russian Empire in 1858 and 1860 through the Treaty of Aigun and the Convention of Peking, respectively. The leaked documents should not be a surprise to anyone for several reasons. First, any self-respecting government would review all security threats. Second, given the historical mistrust and ‘sleep with one eye’ relationship between the two neighbors, the current ‘friends without limits’ relationship will not last forever.
China and Russia do not pose a nuclear threat to each other today because they are aligned and focused on weakening US global economic dominance and political influence. Russia, in particular, is becoming more economically dependent on China as Western sanctions raise the cost of its war in Ukraine, straining the country’s ability to compete globally. This growing economic dependence on China, the world’s second-largest economy, helps mute the Kremlin’s public concerns about China’s growing nuclear arsenal.
Cost Burden of Nuclear Arsenals
The US and Russian nuclear arsenals require routine annual maintenance. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the US will spend an average of $95 billion annually on its nuclear arsenal between 2025 and 2034.
This compares with Russia’s and China’s estimated annual spending of $8.1 billion and $12.5 billion, respectively. The Russian defense budget is classified, with the nuclear component hidden across several budget categories, thus making an accurate estimate difficult. The same is true of Chinese nuclear spending, so these estimates are approximations based on educated guesses. However, it suffices to say that the US outspends all nuclear powers combined by a multiple of 2X.
As a share of the federal budget, Russia allocates the largest share to its nuclear arsenal among the three nuclear powers. This reflects Russia’s smaller overall budget compared with those of the US and China, the world’s first- and second-largest economies. It also reflects Russia’s prioritization of nuclear capabilities as a strategic deterrent and its global reputation as a nuclear power. The latter’s value should not be underestimated.
Russia’s cost burden in maintaining its nuclear arsenal should also be considered in the context that more than 40% of the Russian Federal budget is earmarked for the war and internal security.
Conclusion
The expiration of New START marks the beginning of a new era that may indeed trigger a three-way nuclear arms race – the US, Russia, and China. However, Russia’s ability to compete will be hampered by resource constraints brought on by the Russo-Ukrainian war. Russia is struggling to produce the conventional weapons needed for the war in Ukraine, and the manufacturing capacity to build new nuclear bombers and submarines, as noted in previous Barbershop Whispers publications, is practically nonexistent.
China is the new scorpion and wild card that could trigger a new nuclear arms race. Chinese President Xi Jinping has publicly stated his goal is to transform China into the world’s largest economy, and with that also comes military dominance. While China has not yet reached nuclear parity with the US and Russia, it is expected to do so by 2035.
Additional Reading(s)
Russia Says it Regrets Expiration of New START (PBS, 05 Feb 2026)
Feed the War Machine – Russian Budget 2025 (Barbershop Whispers…Russia, 06 Oct 2024)
Running to Stand Still: Russian Nuclear Modernization After New START (War on the Rocks, 13 Feb 2026)
The Resilient Russian Economy – Until it is Not (Barbershop Whispers…Russia, 23 Oct 2025)
A Timeline of Oppenheimer and His Legacy (Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 17 Jul 2023)
Three Scorpions in a Bottle? Disturbing Movements at Nuclear Test Sites in Russia, China and US (Toda Peace Institute, 16 Nov 2023)
Leaked Russian Military Files Reveal Criteria for First Strike (Financial Times, 28 Feb 2024)
Statement to the Conference of Disarmament (US State Department, 06 Feb 2026)
Hidden Costs: Nuclear Weapons Spending 2024 (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN, June 2025)
Follow-ups & Quick Bites
Follow-ups
Mexico Delivers Humanitarian Aid to Cuba – Russia to Deliver Oil?
In last week’s BWR Quick Bites, I discussed how and when the Cuban regime may fall.
This past week, amidst the US oil embargo on Cuba, two Mexican ships delivered 900 tonnes of foodstuffs and medicine to Cuba. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum addressed the delivery in her morning news conference, promising that more help was on the way.
“We are sending different forms of help, different forms of support. Today, the ships arrive. When they return, we are going to send more support of a different type.”
She described Mexico’s role as “opening the doors for dialogue to develop” between Cuba and the US and insisted that maintaining Cuba’s sovereignty would be paramount. What she did not address was the need to liberate the Cuban people from the oppressive Cuban regime.
The Kremlin has announced that it will supply Cuba with oil as part of a “humanitarian” effort. This past week, Rossiya and Norwind Airlines suspended flights to Cuba due to refueling difficulties in Cuba. The Russian federal aviation regulator Rosaviatsia stated,
“Rossiya Airlines will operate a number of return flights only — from Havana and Varadero to Moscow — to ensure the evacuation of Russian tourists currently in Cuba,”
In 2025, the Kremlin committed to delivering 30,000 barrels of oil to Cuba per month. Only two shipments were received by Cuba. It remains to be seen whether the Kremlin will deliver and violate the US oil embargo on Cuba.
Additional Reading(s)
Mexico Delivers Humanitarian Aid to Cuba (Al Jazeera, 12 Feb 2025)
Russia to Deliver Oil to Cuba (Izvestia, 12 Feb 2026)
Quick Bites
Marco Rubio Charms the Munich Security Conference
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio charmed Europeans with a reassuring message, less aggressive yet firm, about the US administration’s intent to reshape the trans-Atlantic alliance and advance its priorities after more than a year of U.S. President Donald Trump’s often-hostile rhetoric toward Europe.
In his 30-minute speech, he reminded the attendees of America’s centuries-long European roots and said the United States would remain forever tied to the continent even as it pushes for changes in the relationship and the institutions.
Additional Reading(s)
America’s charm offensive in Munich masks harder line on Europe (Politico, 14 Feb 2026)
Secretary Rubio delivers remarks to the Munich Security Conference (YouTube, 14 Feb 2026)
Vol 4, No 09 - BWR 15.02.2026
Thank you for reading “Barbershop Whispers....Russia” written by Adam A Blanco! “Barbershop Whispers…Russia” is a product of e8Q Technologies, a consultancy with insights on all things Eurasia. Subscribe for free to receive new posts.
Thanks Adam! 3 truths would appear self-evident: 1) Putin offered to extend Start because he can’t afford to spend more; 2) in no way, shape or form will Xi consider China entering an agreement until China reaches parity, or the U.S. and Russia reduce to Chinese levels; 3) Trump wanted Start to expire. Is that accurate?