Russia had extended an olive branch, offering to uphold warhead and launcher caps voluntarily even after the deadline. But with no clear reply from the Biden administration—wait, no, the article mentions Trump in January, but contextually it’s recent—options now lie wide open.

‘We consider all provisions of New START and mutual statements no longer in force,’ the ministry declared. This includes core limits on intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched missiles, and heavy bombers. National security will dictate Moscow’s response to any perceived threats, potentially with advanced countermeasures.

Background on the pact: Brokered in Prague in 2010, it entered force in 2011, slashing deployable warheads by nearly 50% from Cold War peaks. An extension in 2021 pushed it to 2026, but mutual suspensions over Ukraine deepened the rift.

Putin, in a forward-looking September address, promised a grace period of compliance absent U.S. provocations. Trump echoed hopes for renewal just last month. Now, with INF gone since 2019, New START’s end marks the collapse of the post-Cold War arms control architecture.

Analysts fear escalation as Russia hints at arsenal modernization. Still, diplomatic channels aren’t sealed; Moscow welcomes talks for stability if sincerity prevails. The global nuclear order hangs in balance, demanding urgent leadership from both capitals to avert a dangerous new arms spiral.

Enacted in 2010, the treaty slashed deployed warheads to 1,550 per side and limited launchers to 700 missiles and bombers. Its crown jewel was transparency: mutual inspections allowed each side to peer into the other’s most sensitive facilities, building confidence and preventing surprise buildups.

A five-year extension in 2021 bought time, but Russia’s 2022 Ukraine offensive shattered the fragile peace. Putin halted inspections in 2023, arguing that US and NATO aid to Ukraine made Russian sites vulnerable. Moscow pledged to honor limits voluntarily, and Putin floated a one-year extension last fall, but talks stalled.

Now free from obligations, both powers can modernize aggressively. America is advancing its ‘Sentinel’ ICBMs and Columbia-class submarines, while Russia touts hypersonic Avangard systems and Poseidon drones. Without caps, a tit-for-tat escalation seems inevitable, echoing the 1980s arms race that nearly bankrupted the Soviet Union.

Global leaders are sounding alarms. The UN chief lamented the ‘dangerous void’ in arms control, while analysts predict ripple effects: China may accelerate its buildup, emboldened by the superpower impasse. In an era of hybrid wars and instant nuclear saber-rattling, New START’s end strips away a key stabilizer, forcing diplomats to confront a more volatile nuclear landscape.

Putin described the Poseidon test, which ran on its nuclear propulsion for the first time, as a ‘huge success.’ He highlighted the drone’s unmatched speed and operational depth, asserting that ‘there is no way to intercept it.’ The President further revealed that the miniaturized nuclear reactor powering Poseidon is significantly smaller than those found on submarines, yet it provides immense power for its warhead, which is reportedly more powerful than that of the prospective Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile.

First revealed by Putin in 2018, the Poseidon drone, also known as Status-6 or NATO’s Kanyon, is designed as an autonomous underwater vehicle (UUV). Its primary role is reportedly to detonate near enemy coastlines, generating a catastrophic radioactive tsunami capable of obliterating coastal infrastructure and rendering regions uninhabitable. Powered by its own compact nuclear reactor, Poseidon boasts virtually unlimited range and endurance, operating far beyond the reach of conventional defense systems. While initial deployment plans for 32 units were announced, challenges may impact the timeline.