85 Seconds to Midnight, or Why the World Is Once Again Standing at the Nuclear Edge

February 5 marks the expiration of the START III Treaty. Yet, Moscow has yet to receive a response from Washington regarding its proposal to adhere to the limits set by the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START).

According to Axios, it is expected that Russia and the United States will agree to observe the treaty’s conditions for at least six months, during which negotiations on a potential new agreement will continue.

The START III treaty served for over a decade as a fragile but tangible barrier against a renewed nuclear arms race. Now, that barrier is dissolving. Moscow has repeatedly expressed willingness to discuss updating the treaty that limits strategic offensive arms, but Washington has chosen silence. Officially, the U.S. does not refuse dialogue, but in practice, negotiations are frozen—this silence, too, is a form of response.

Sergei Ryabkov, Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia:

"We are losing stabilizing elements of the previous framework, and the elements of such volition on the brink of chaos are becoming increasingly evident."

"Today, I feel like I am witnessing the words of Robert Oppenheimer, who, upon seeing the first mushroom cloud, declared: ‘Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.’ The world is entering a period where nuclear deterrence is no longer a tool of stability but a source of alarm."

According to the Nuclear Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Center at Nagasaki University, there were over 12,000 nuclear warheads worldwide in 2025. Nine countries—nine nuclear-armed states—possess the capability to alter the course of history in mere minutes.

Yuri Samonkin, Political Scientist and Head of the Eurasian Institute of Youth Initiatives (Russia):

"The START treaty was the cornerstone of international security because, today, a vast number of countries have declared themselves almost nuclear superpowers. Over recent years, this number has grown sharply, to the point where it is impossible to say definitively whether Iran possesses nuclear weapons or not, yet the country is still considered a nuclear state."

To understand why the disappearance of START III is so dangerous, it’s essential to recall how the system of nuclear arms control agreements was formed. Its foundation was laid during the Cold War, when two superpowers recognized that an arms race was not only pointless but deadly.

In July 1991, U.S. President George H. W. Bush and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev signed START I in Moscow.

It was a breakthrough: for the first time, both sides agreed to significant, deep reductions in strategic arsenals. The treaty symbolized a new era—one in which the world seemed headed toward a more secure future.

Subsequently, START II, then the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), and finally, in 2010, START III, which entered into force in 2011. It limited deployed nuclear warheads to 1,550 per side and deployed delivery systems to 700. Equally important was the treaty’s transparency measures: inspections, data exchanges, and notifications about launches—all designed to reduce errors, misunderstandings, and accidental escalation.

Today, that system is crumbling. The U.S. withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, then from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treatyin 2019. The Open Skies Treaty effectively ceased to exist. START III was the last bastion of predictability. In 2021, it was extended for five years through a one-time delay, with the expectation that during that period, a new replacement treaty would be negotiated.

Alexei Leonkov, Military Analyst of "Arsenal of the Fatherland" (Russia):

"The lowering of the threshold for nuclear weapon use is the first danger. The fact that Americans have recorded that the Tomahawk missile can be used at the discretion of a military commander, rather than the U.S. Congress or the President, is already alarming."

One obstacle to a new agreement is China. Former U.S. President Donald Trump emphasized that Beijing must be included in any future deal—since China’s nuclear arsenal is currently the fastest-growing in the world. Yet, Beijing responded without enthusiasm.

Lin Jian, Official Spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry:

"China’s nuclear capabilities are by no means comparable to those of the United States. Demanding China’s participation in nuclear disarmament negotiations at this stage is unfair and illogical."

The expiration of START III means that, for the first time in half a century, Russia and the U.S. will operate without any binding treaties regulating their strategic arsenals. While this may not lead to immediate arms buildup, it erodes predictability. Without inspections, states will have to rely on intelligence and assumptions—assumptions that are inherently dangerous in the realm of nuclear deterrence.

Today, as the international system faces its deepest crisis since World War II, the risk of miscalculation grows exponentially. The decision to move the Doomsday Clock to 85 seconds before midnight is not merely a scientific gesture; it reflects the true state of the world. The nuclear threat has ceased to be an abstract concept. It has re-entered the political agenda as a tool of pressure and a factor in strategic calculations.