Washington did not agree to adhere to the New START limitations after its expiration, a senior official has confirmed
The US and Russia have not agreed to informally adhere to New START nuclear reduction treaty limitations, a senior State Department official has confirmed.
The cornerstone strategic arms control agreement officially expired on February 5. Moscow reached out to Washington on renewing the treaty yet received no formal response. US President Donald Trump has since denounced the agreement as a “badly negotiated deal” and said a “new, improved, and modernized” version should be negotiated instead.
No “gentlemen’s agreement” is in place between Washington and Moscow to continue informally following the limitations imposed under the now-defunct treaty, US Assistant Secretary for Arms Control and Nonproliferation Christopher Yeaw said on Tuesday at an event hosted by the conservative Hudson Institute think tank in Washington.
“I know of no such agreement,” Yeaw stated.
The idea to continue mutually adhering to the treaty limitations was floated by Russia as the agreement expired. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Moscow had suggested doing so for another year, but the initiative had “remained unanswered.”
The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) was signed in 2010, building upon earlier arms control agreements between Russia and the US and capping the number of strategic nuclear warheads and launchers that could be deployed. The agreement also established a monitoring mechanism to check on the state of both American and Russian arsenals. The deal was originally set to expire in 2021 but was extended for another five years at the time.
In 2023, Moscow suspended the monitoring mechanisms, citing Ukrainian attacks on elements of Russia’s nuclear deterrence and accusing the West of having a hand in the strikes. While Trump has alleged the agreement was being “grossly violated,” no evidence that either of the sides surpassed the limitations ever emerged.
The US leader has long argued that a new deal should also involve China, but Beijing has repeatedly rejected the idea as “pointless” given its arsenal was incompatible with that of Russia and the US. Moscow has backed Beijing’s stance, stating it “respects” the country’s position.
