Donald Trump has long expressed a deep concern regarding the devastating potential of nuclear warfare and has made it a key focus of his administration to actively seek ways to prevent such a catastrophe. Following his return to the presidency, Trump has emphasized his commitment to initiating arms control discussions with global leaders, notably Russias President Vladimir Putin and Chinas President Xi Jinping. Amid these efforts, the administration has also made strides toward negotiating a new agreement aimed at curbing Irans advancing nuclear program, a move that has garnered some positive attention. However, contradictions within his policy framework may not only fail to mitigate nuclear risks but could also inadvertently fuel a new arms race across multiple fronts.

The first and perhaps most pressing concern is the issue of nuclear proliferation. The White House has justifiably urged European allies to take on a greater share of their own defense responsibilities. However, the administration has not indicated any intention to withdraw the protective US nuclear umbrella that has historically shielded its allies. Nonetheless, the recent deterioration in transatlantic relationships, compounded by Trumps overtures towards Putin in an attempt to negotiate an end to the ongoing war in Ukraine, has significantly eroded European leaders' confidence in the United States' commitment to extended deterrence.

In response to perceived vulnerabilities, nations like Germany and Poland are openly discussing the necessity for their own nuclear options, whether through sharing the nuclear deterrents of France or the United Kingdom or, in Poland's case, potentially hosting US nuclear weapons on their territory. French President Emmanuel Macron has also sparked a dialogue on how Frances independently maintained nuclear arsenal could serve as a more comprehensive deterrent in the context of European security.

Allied nations in East Asia are similarly expressing concerns regarding the reliability of US commitments, particularly in light of the nuclear threats posed by China and North Korea, both of which have been strengthening their cooperative ties with Russia. In South Korea, public support for acquiring nuclear weapons appears to be on the rise, while Japan, long hesitant to consider such measures, is also reexamining the taboo surrounding nuclear armament. Meanwhile, in the Middle East, both Turkey and Saudi Arabia have indicated their intent to develop nuclear capabilities if Iran succeeds in obtaining a nuclear weapon. Despite renewed US efforts to prevent this scenario, Irans progress toward its nuclear ambitions can largely be attributed to Trump's controversial withdrawal from the 2015 international nuclear agreement during his first term.

Experts in weapons proliferation warn that should any US ally decide to pursue nuclear armament, it could trigger a domino effect, prompting other nations to follow suit. This would pose a significant threat to the integrity of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), a cornerstone international agreement that has successfully limited the number of nuclear-armed states to just nine for decades.

More immediately concerning is the prospect of an increase in nuclear armaments among existing nuclear states, particularly China. The Pentagon has projected that China could potentially double its nuclear arsenal to over 1,000 warheads by the year 2030. Compounding this issue is the impending expiration of the New START treaty, the last remaining arms control agreement between the US and Russia that sets caps on the number of warheads and missiles each nation can deploy, which is set to lapse next February. Tensions escalated when Putin halted the treatys implementation in response to Russias full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

During his first term, Trump was slow to extend the New START treaty, partly because he believed that China should be included in any future nuclear negotiationsa stance that Beijing staunchly resisted by asserting that its nuclear arsenal was considerably smaller than that of the US or Russia. As Chinas nuclear stockpile increases, its rationale for exclusion from talks becomes increasingly untenable. However, engaging both Moscow and Beijing in a triadic dialogue about nuclear arms control will demand a level of diplomatic sophistication that the Trump administration has yet to demonstrate, particularly given its handling of foreign policy issues thus far, including the delicate negotiations surrounding the Ukraine conflict.

In todays complicated geopolitical landscape, Britains nuclear deterrent no longer appears to be the costly relic that some critics have labeled it. Although the UKs nuclear capabilities are significantly smaller than Russias, when combined with France's more adaptable stance on its own nuclear arms, it could provide Europe with a formidable nuclear umbrella capable of at least compelling Moscow to reconsider its aggressive posturing, while also offering some degree of reassurance to NATO partners. Nevertheless, the Trump administration must remain aware that any hint of a diminished US nuclear umbrella could provoke further nations to pursue their own nuclear capabilities, and the more countries that possess such weapons, the greater the risk that one could eventually be used.