Renee Parsons<\/p>\n
In his own specialized view of the world, President Donald Trump can take credit for allowing the New START Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) to expire. \u00a0 <\/span>That might come as a surprise to those American voters who believed they were electing a \u201cPeace President\u201d \u2013 although, as my grandmother might say, the Bloom is off the Rose.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Without a comparable START Treaty in place, the most frightening aspect of a world with no New START, with no nuclear arms control, without a public debate on the horrors of nuclear war is that Donald Trump is in the White House. While the world eagerly awaits President Trump\u2019s acquiescence to another unprovoked war on Iran, and despite specious peacenik credentials claiming to have ended eight wars<\/span><\/a>, none which measure up to scrutiny; the US may easily find itself drawn into another gratuitous\u00a0 <\/span>war in Iran.<\/p>\n With the unexpected\u00a0 <\/span>interventionist foreign policy bombing seven countries<\/span><\/a> in 2025, (Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, Iran, Syria, Nigeria, Venezuela), there is no longer any guarantee of peace in an unpeaceful world with the finale of the New START Treaty. \u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n The New START Treaty was initiated in 2011 by both Russia and the United States limiting all offensive nuclear arms for a period of ten years; then another five years until it reached the \u2018no renewal\u2019<\/i> period of Feb. 5, 2026.\u00a0 <\/span>The conclusion of New START represents the last fifty years<\/span><\/a> of global nuclear arms control that began in 1972 with the\u00a0 <\/span>Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) with Russia legally binding limits on nuclear arsenals.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n New START Treaty<\/a><\/span> was originally regarded as enhancing US national security as both countries agreed in 2010 to verifiable arms limitations especially on Russian deployment of international nuclear weapons.\u00a0 <\/span>Both sides were limited to 1,550 deployable nuclear warheads with limits on 700 long\u00a0 <\/span>range deployed missiles and bombers with another limit on 800 deployed ICBM, SLBM and heavy bombers equipped with nuclear armaments.<\/p>\n Verification included embedded on site inspections, data exchanges and notification of strategic arms ensuring compliance by both sides. Meanwhile New START<\/span><\/a> promised a \u201cpredictability, transparency and stability through robust verification protocols.<\/i>\u201d<\/p>\n In September, 2024 Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested a one year extension of New START\u2019s quantitative limits<\/span><\/a> beyond the February renewal.\u00a0 <\/span>Yet falling on deaf ears, the President responded casually \u201cit<\/i> sounds like a good idea<\/i>\u201d with no certainty that the President was referring to New START or some other coincidental event.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n In an inexplicable dismissal, the President consistently failed to respond to Putin\u2019s suggestion for a one year START extension past its February deadline.<\/p>\n In somewhat of a diplomatic breach, the President did not respond affirmatively or engage in any diplomatic effort that would have initiated a short term, temporary\u00a0 <\/span>renewal of New START since the US \u2013 Russia relationship lacks a formally appointed US Ambassador to Russia or a functioning American Embassy in Moscow.<\/p>\n However, in a belated Truth Social response, Trump suggested that \u201cRather than extend \u201cNEW START\u201d (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<\/i>.” \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded that Russia regretted the end of New START:\u00a0 <\/span>\u201cIn any case, the Russian Federation will maintain its responsible and attentive approach to the issue of strategic stability in the field of nuclear weapons<\/i>.\u201d<\/p>\n As of January 2025, the Stockholm International<\/span><\/a> Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) reported that Russia possessed a total of 4,309 warheads, while the US has 3,700.<\/p>\n Of interest, none of Trump\u2019s Cabinet appointments were either fully aware of\u00a0 <\/span>the significance of START and why it should be extended while no professional staff who understood New START\u2019s role to global peace had the initiative to bring the matter to the President\u2019s attention.<\/p>\n Never a fan of a formalized agreement that might imply the US as a lesser military power, if not the biggest, the best, the most fearsome military force in the history of the world, has brought the US to new heights as the world\u2019s most active perpetrator of war.<\/p>\n Immediately upon inauguration, Trump provided a warning of what was to come when the US began an illegal bombing against the Houthis of Yemen in the Red Sea.\u00a0 <\/span>The Houthis were registering their opposition to Israeli shipping in response to the genocide in Gaza. \u00a0 <\/span>Hence, the US expended $1B<\/span><\/a> in a failed effort to deter the Houthis.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n As the major architect of the US $1.5 Billion military industrial complex, Trump remains unrestrained by international law and has no need for agreements or Treaties that might limit his military options.\u00a0 <\/span>As he told the NY Times, it is his \u2018mind\u2019 that will decide what he decides without external advice or contrary opinion exhibiting some elements of dementia.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n In a Truth Social<\/span><\/a> post in October, 2025 Trump cited that the US has \u201cmore nuclear weapons<\/i><\/span><\/a> than any other country<\/i>\u201d\u00a0 <\/span>(not true) as he ordered the Pentagon to \u201cimmediately resume<\/i>\u201d atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons for the first time in thirty three years<\/span><\/a>.<\/p>\n The US moratorium on nuclear atmospheric detonations began when former President George H.W. Bush signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty<\/span><\/a> in 1996. The US Senate, however, in an absence of wisdom, voted 48-51 against ratifying the treaty <\/span><\/a>in 1999.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Arms Control Association and nuclear weapon expert<\/span><\/a> Daryl Kimball responded that the US “has no technical, military, or political reason to resume nuclear explosive testing” <\/i>and could “trigger strong public opposition in Nevada,”\u00a0<\/i>where atmospheric testing had once been conducted. <\/i><\/p>\n Andrea Striker, a non proliferation nuclear weapon expert commented that Trump needs <\/i>to clarify what he means by<\/i> \u2018nuclear testing;\u2019 <\/i>meaning low yield as Russia and <\/i>China conduct or \u201cfull scale tests.\u201d\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n Former GOP Rep. Brandon Williams, Trump nominee for the National Nuclear Security Administration stated that he would advise against<\/i><\/span><\/a> resuming explosive nuclear tests<\/i>, despite\u00a0former Trump officials’ desire<\/span><\/a>\u00a0to end the US self-imposed 1992 moratorium on atmospheric tests.<\/p>\n Since 2002, the US has an established history of withdrawal from arms limitation treaties beginning with its exit from the 1972\u00a0 <\/span>ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty) for fear the country could not respond to a potential terrorist attack.\u00a0 <\/span>During Trump\u2019s first term (2017-2020) the US abruptly exited the 1987 (INF) Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty<\/span><\/a> and the 1992 Treaty on Open Skies – none of which has stopped Trump from fantasizing about a $3.6 Trillion Golden Dome<\/span><\/a> Missile Defense System to be built by Space X.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Moments after a US \u2013 Iran negotiation in Oman, the US unpredictably launched a \u2018maximum pressure campaign\u2019<\/i>\u00a0 <\/span>alleging \u201cillicit trade in Iranian petroleum, petroleum products, and petrochemical products\u201d<\/i>\u00a0 with President Trump signing an Executive Order<\/span><\/a> imposing 25% tariffs on sixteen country\u2019s “doing business<\/i>” with Iran. The Order targets all imports from Iran’s trading partners including China, India, Turkey, UAE, Brazil, and Russia. The White House has not clarified what constitutes \u2018doing business\u2019<\/i> or how the policy will be enforced.<\/p>\n At the same time, Iran has reiterated that Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Turkey<\/span><\/a>, Oman informed the US that its air space would prohibit US war<\/span><\/a> planes use in any attack against Iran including refueling.<\/p>\n Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov \u201ccondemned<\/span><\/a>\u201d new US threats against Iran as \u201cabsolutely unacceptable<\/i>\u201d leaving little doubt about the exploiting of \u201cforeign-inspired unrest<\/i>\u201d while warning of \u2018dire consequences\u2019<\/i> referring to Israel\u2019s initiation of military hostilities and the undermining of \u2018global stability\u2019<\/i> which is what Israel does best.\u00a0 <\/span>Lavrov was responding to US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee who claimed that Trump \u2018doesn\u2019t make empty threats<\/i>.\u2019\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n A week earlier during US Senate testimony, Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted that there are \u201c30- 40,000 American troops<\/i><\/span><\/a> in eight to nine facilities in the immediate area.\u00a0 <\/span>All within the reach of an array of thousands of Iranian one-way UAV\u2019s and short term ballistic missiles<\/i>\u201d which begs the question what is Iran\u2019s threat to US national security.<\/p>\n In addition, the Iranian Foreign Minister Aragachi made it perfectly clear that \u201dIf Washington attacks us, we will strike their bases in the region.\u201d <\/i><\/p>\n President Eisenhower\u2019s 1961 Farewell Address: \u00a0 <\/span>\u201cIn the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist<\/i>.\u201d<\/p>\n