Follow us on social

50934678471_2ec727763f_o-scaled

Biden’s nuclear weapons policy carries ‘the seeds of a new nuclear arms race’

Experts say the White House’s new nuclear strategy is a major missed opportunity to change American policy for the better.

Reporting | Europe

Following months of delays, the Biden administration released its Nuclear Posture Review Thursday. The document declares that “the fundamental role of nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attack on the United States, our Allies, and partners,” while also stating that America’s nuclear arsenal could be used to deter conventional “attacks that have a strategic effect against the United States or its Allies and partners.”

The policy falls short of what some hoped would be a significant shift to American nuclear posture following President Joe Biden’s statements on the campaign trail, according to Daryl Kimball of the Arms Control Association.

“This broad and ambiguous nuclear weapons declaratory policy walks back President Biden's earlier position and pledge to narrow the role of U.S. nuclear weapons,” Kimball said in a statement, adding that “policies that threaten the first use of nuclear weapons” carry “unacceptable risks.”

The policy document’s release comes amid a spike in concern about the potential for nuclear war. Notably, Russian President Vladimir Putin has suggested on multiple occasions that he would use nuclear weapons in order to “defend” territory that he has attempted to wrest from Ukraine, and the United States reportedly plans to move a more accurate version of its primary nuclear weapon to Europe.

During a press conference Thursday, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin emphasized the importance of maintaining open channels of communication with Moscow in order to avoid escalation. 

“As long as we have the channels of communication open, and we're able to communicate what's important to us, then I think we have an opportunity to manage escalation,” Austin said.

In the spirit of de-escalation, the new posture review also called for efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons in the long term and expressed Biden’s desire to end a submarine-launched tactical nuke program, which Kimball called a “destabilizing and very expensive new capability.”

However, the document also endorses the multi-trillion dollar plan to modernize America’s nuclear arsenal and maintains a different tactical nuclear program, a pair of moves that “carry the seeds of a new nuclear arms race,” according to Bill Hartung of the Quincy Institute.

“The current U.S. arsenal is more than sufficient to deter any nation from attacking the United States,” Hartung said. “Building more nuclear weapons is both excessive and dangerous.”


President Joe Biden delivers remarks to Department of Defense personnel, with Vice President Kamala Harris and Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 2021. (DoD photo by Lisa Ferdinando)
Reporting | Europe
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.