nuclear-news

Without START, everything could end

With a major nuclear exchange there would be many detonations, killing billions of people. As the fallout spreads, billions more would sicken and die a slower death from radiation poisoning. The soot and smoke would block out sunlight, causing a “nuclear winter”, a fall in temperature that would destroy most food-producing agriculture. The electromagnetic field on which the internet and much of modern technology depends would be disrupted

All of these effects would multiply each other in unforeseeable ways. Civilizations would collapse. And radiation hangs around for millions of years. It disrupts DNA, so the long-term biological effects, assuming there are still life forms around, would be devastating.

  February 1, 2026 by beyondnuclearinternational

Ignoring this last nuclear treaty comes at great peril, writes Carol Wolman

A key nuclear treaty, the START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) expires on Feb 4th 2026. This bilateral treaty between the US and Russia caps the number of nuclear weapons each side may legally possess. It also mandates bilateral inspections to ensure the treaty is respected on both sides.

Originally signed in 1991 by then Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev and US President H. W. Bush, it successfully reduced the nuclear weapons stockpiles on each side by 80%. This essentially put an end to the nuclear arms race between the US and the Soviet Union, which broke up later that year.

In 2010, a revised New START treaty was negotiated by US President Clinton and Russian President Medvedev. This further reduced stockpiles to about 2000 nuclear warheads apiece. Ratified by both sides in 2011, it had a ten-year term and was renewed for another 5 years in 2021 under President Biden.

Russia’s President Putin has offered to extend the treaty for another year, if the US reciprocates. President Trump said on January 8, 2026: “If it expires, it expires”. Expiration of New START would remove all constraints on expansion of nuclear stockpiles and delivery systems, as well as abolishing bilateral inspections

By way of background:  the first nuclear weapons were used on August 6th and 9th 1945, when the US dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Over the next 20 years, Russia, England, France and China also developed these weapons of mass destruction.

The Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 frightened everyone. Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev placed nuclear armed missiles on the island of Cuba, 90 miles from Florida, and President Kennedy threatened various sorts of retaliation, including nuclear. For 13 days, we didn’t know if we would wake up the next morning.

This alarm set in motion a series of treaties designed to prevent nuclear war. A hotline was installed between the White House and the Kremlin. Atmospheric nuclear testing was banned in 1963 through the Partial Test Ban Treaty. Some underground tests were banned two years later, but it was not until 1996 when all nuclear explosions, including underground, were finally banned through the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), although it has never come into force. However, Russia officially withdrew its ratification of the CTBT in November 2023.

The key nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which entered into force in 1970, was designed to stop the spread of nuclear weapons to countries that did not have them, although four more countries have since joined the “club” — India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel, none of which are signatures to the treaty (North Korea originally joined the treaty but withdrew once it developed nuclear weapons).

As of 2026, Russia, China and the US are all increasing their nuclear budgets exponentially. Global tensions are rising because of many factors: global warming, natural disasters, increases in the demand for energy, and scarcity of essential resources like water and rare minerals, to name a few.  The risk of all-out nuclear war goes up dramatically without New START.

An all-out nuclear war might well be suicidal for humanity; indeed, for most life forms.  Scientists tell us that a number of factors would ensure widespread lethality.

With a major nuclear exchange there would be many detonations, killing billions of people. As the fallout spreads, billions more would sicken and die a slower death from radiation poisoning. The soot and smoke would block out sunlight, causing a “nuclear winter”, a fall in temperature that would destroy most food-producing agriculture. The electromagnetic field on which the internet and much of modern technology depends would be disrupted.

All of these effects would multiply each other in unforeseeable ways. Civilizations would collapse. And radiation hangs around for millions of years. It disrupts DNA, so the long-term biological effects, assuming there are still life forms around, would be devastating.

We have lived with nuclear weapons for 80 years, since the A-bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Horrendous as those were, they were small compared to the hydrogen bombs, 5-40 times more powerful, which are now routine in nuclear stockpiles……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

A new treaty, the UN Treaty on the Prohibition Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), became international law five years ago. Seventy-four nations have ratified it. Most of them are in the Southern Hemisphere; none of them have nuclear weapons.

There is a resolution in the US House of Representatives, HR 77, which supports the tenets of the TPNW. It currently has 44 cosponsors. Is your Representative one of them?

It will take a concerted effort to get rid of nuclear weapons. The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons has many tools for individuals and groups to use. A good start would be to write to periodicals and demand that they run articles about the looming demise of the New START treaty.

Abolishing nuclear weapons begins with paying attention. https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2026/02/01/without-start-everything-could-end/

February 5, 2026 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international