It is a little music that has been repeated since the beginning of the war in Ukraine: is the nuclear threat looming over our heads? This Thursday, October 30, US President Donald Trump ordered the resumption of nuclear tests, interrupted for more than thirty years.
The vague message sounded like a declaration of strength just minutes before his much-anticipated meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. It also comes after a series of announcements by Vladimir Putin about the development of new atomic weapons.
A few days earlier, the Russian leader welcomed the success of the final test of the Bourevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile, which had “unlimited range” and was capable, according to him, of defeating almost all interception systems. He also announced the test of the Poseidon underwater drone, capable of carrying nuclear charges, which Vladimir Putin describes as “impossible to intercept.”
Periodic and common tests.
The United States has not tested nuclear weapons since 1992. Thirty-three years later, “the question is: Is Donald Trump talking about testing new missiles or a nuclear explosion?” asks General Jérôme Pellistrandi, defense consultant for BFMTV.
“Due to testing programs conducted by other countries, I have asked the War Department to begin testing our nuclear weapons on equal terms. This process will begin immediately,” said Donald Trump on his Truth Social network.
“If they do tests, I imagine we have to do them,” he later clarified aboard the presidential plane.
Except officially, neither China nor Russia has conducted a nuclear test for three decades. In fact, after Donald Trump’s statements, Moscow clarified that these were tests of weapons capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, and not nuclear bombs themselves.
“Donald Trump says he wants to do like his adversaries, but his adversaries have not tested nuclear weapons, only vectors,” observes Étienne Marcuz, researcher at the Foundation for Strategic Research (FRS) and specialist in nuclear deterrence.
In contrast, the United States, like other nuclear-armed countries such as France, periodically conducts these types of tests, but does not necessarily communicate about them. With these tests, the country ensures the reliability of its arsenal. Washington also periodically tests its nuclear delivery systems, such as its intercontinental ballistic missiles.
“trumpet” ads
So is this all just a big PR stunt? In his statements, Donald Trump also claimed the supremacy of the United States, which “possesses more nuclear weapons than any other country.” A statement denied by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), according to which Russia has 4,309 nuclear warheads deployed or stored, compared to 3,700 in the United States and 600 in China.
As for the Russian tests, this is also an announcement effect. The nuclear specialist Étienne Marcuz even speaks of a “trompe l’oeil”. These tests “are still technological feats but operationally they are of no use,” he says.
According to Vladimir Putin, the Bourevestnik missile flew for “about 15 hours”, traveling 14,000 kilometers, more than the distance between Moscow and Washington. The Poseidon system would be designed to transport a large nuclear payload and attack coastal areas. However, according to Étienne Marcuz, these are “unusable weapons”, because current US defense systems are already vulnerable to existing Russian ballistic missiles.
For General Jérôme Pellistrandi, “this nuclear rhetoric used by Vladimir Putin reflects a certain excitement”, in particular due to his marginalization, illustrated this week by the meeting between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping, a supposed ally of the Kremlin.
“In addition to making noise with its nuclear tests, it was left out with this spectacular meeting,” says the specialist.
Furthermore, “the modernization of the Russian nuclear arsenal is going poorly,” explains Étienne Marcuz, citing in particular the Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile, which has suffered numerous failures, “the last of which even destroyed the test site.”
“A nuclear arms race” in Russia and China
Therefore, if nuclear tests have not been carried out, “we are very clearly in a nuclear arms race” in China and Russia, which explains the statements of the United States, underlines Jérôme Pellistrandi. “Donald Trump sees how his two great adversaries present new weapons,” agrees Étienne Marcuz.
This is particularly the case for China, which, according to Sipri, is “periodically increasing its nuclear force” and could reach “1,000 warheads in seven or eight years.” Vladimir Putin signed a law this Monday that ends an already obsolete de facto agreement between Russia and the United States on the reprocessing of plutonium and that sought to prevent both parties from manufacturing even more nuclear weapons.
“The United States fears being faced with a war with a China-Russia alliance,” says Étienne Marcuz and adds:
“There is a risk of proliferation.”
This risk is also accentuated by the “Golden Dome”, the expensive anti-missile shield desired by Donald Trump. “When a country increases its defenses, it encourages others to increase their attacks,” says Étienne Marcuz. For its part, the United States is in a phase of modernizing its nuclear arsenal that is taking longer than expected. “The program is experiencing enormous budget overruns,” says the researcher.
Towards new countries with nuclear weapons?
This nuclear rhetoric has returned to global diplomacy since the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and is often stirred up by Moscow. “Vladimir Putin’s aggressiveness is a little towards Americans, but especially towards Europeans,” comments Jérôme Pellistrandi.
“Nuclear deterrence is always latent because it prevents local conflicts from spreading,” adds Étienne Marcuz. Especially since Vladimir Putin’s announcements come when Donald Trump has raised his voice against the Kremlin to end the war in Ukraine.
So what about global nuclear proliferation, beyond the three giants: Russia, China and the United States? Sipri estimates the number of nuclear warheads possessed by the nine countries with atomic weapons at more than 12,200.
Among them, several countries are developing their capabilities. For example, India and Pakistan “have continued to develop new types of nuclear weapons delivery systems in 2024.” The UK is not expected to increase its number of warheads in 2024, but given the country’s decision in 2021 to increase its warhead limit from 225 to 260, that number is likely to increase in the future, Sipri says.
As for France, it is increasing its technological capabilities but not the number of warheads, with maintenance at the operational level and modernization of equipment. “We must be able to have a credible deterrent element,” explains General Jérôme Pellistrandi.
Specialists are especially observing what they call a change in “horizontal non-proliferation”, that is, the possible increase in the number of countries possessing nuclear weapons. At issue: the protection of the United States, or “American umbrella”, which is increasingly unreliable. Consequently, “other countries are considering acquiring the weapon,” says Étienne Marcuz.
The end of nonproliferation?
But then is this the end of the principle of nuclear non-proliferation throughout the world? Washington and Moscow remain bound by the New Start disarmament treaty, which limits each side to 1,550 deployed strategic offensive warheads and provides for a verification mechanism, interrupted for two years.
Although the treaty is set to expire next February, Vladimir Putin proposed in early October extending it for a year, but did not mention a possible resumption of arsenal inspections.
In 2019, during Donald Trump’s first term, the United States withdrew from another major treaty signed in 1987 with Russia on intermediate-range nuclear weapons.
“Treaties only bind those who believe in them,” says Étienne Marcuz.
Major nuclear weapons states continued to modernize their arsenals last year, paving the way for a new nuclear arms race, Sipri warned in a report published in June. Since the end of the Cold War, old warheads have generally been decommissioned faster than the deployment of new ones, leading to a decline in the total number of warheads. This trend is likely to reverse in the coming years.
When asked about the risk of a slide, Donald Trump responded: “I don’t think so. I think it’s pretty well secured.”
“More to lose than to win”
Should we expect, this time, nuclear weapons tests in the coming months? During its recent announcements, Russia was very cautious with Washington, notifying its tests “so that there is no ambiguity and that a nuclear war is not triggered, in some way, by mistake,” explains Jérôme Pellistrandi.
“We hope that President Trump has been correctly informed about this. This cannot be considered a nuclear test,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
However, in view of the statements of the President of the United States, Étienne Marcuz believes that “we cannot exclude nuclear weapons tests”, since there is still a place for it in the state of Nevada.
Speaking to AFP, Doreen Horschig, a researcher at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, estimated that a test site could be ready in “six to ten months for a very basic underground test.”
“The deadline is much longer if you want to test new warheads and new capabilities,” he added. He notes, however, that the desire to resume testing could run into opposition from American elected officials “on both sides of the political spectrum,” while America’s allies do not “see the need.”
Above all, in fact, “the United States does not need to test nuclear weapons,” maintains Étienne Marcuz. In fact, according to him, “this would leave the possibility for his adversaries to do the same.” “There is more to lose than gain,” concludes the specialist.
INFOGRAPHIC. “The United States has more nuclear weapons than any other country”: the world has 12,241 warheads distributed among 9 countries (France is the 4th power on the planet)
Source: BFM TV
