Thread by @UnderSecT

New START was signed in 2010 and its limits on warheads and launchers are no longer relevant in 2026 when one nuclear power is expanding its arsenal at a scale and pace not seen in over half a century and another continues to maintain and develop a vast range of nuclear systems unconstrained by New START’s terms. (1/6) @UN_Disarmament @usmissiongeneva @usunvie

…almost all of the U.S. deployed nuclear forces were subject to New START while only a fraction of Russia's much larger stockpile was…exactly zero Chinese nuclear weapons were covered by New START. @mfa_russia @MFA_CPC (2/6)

No longer constrained by the political-military circumstances of 2010 and the treaty they yielded and in response to the destabilizing behavior of these other countries, the United States can now finally take steps…to strengthen deterrence on behalf of the American people and our allies. (3/6)

China has conducted nuclear explosive tests, including preparing for tests with designated yields in the hundreds of tons… China has used decoupling – a method to decrease the effectiveness of seismic monitoring – to hide its activities from the world. China conducted one such yield producing nuclear test on June 22, 2020. (4/6)

This confluence of factors – serial Russian violations, growth of worldwide stockpiles, and flaws in New START’s design and implementation – gives the United States a clear imperative to call for a new architecture that addresses the threats of today, not those of a bygone era. (5/6)

As throughout our history, the United States has maintained a willingness to seek strategic stability and arms control arrangements that are verifiable, enforceable, and contribute to the security of the United States and her allies. What we are proposing is not talks for the sake of talks—with this effort, the United States is looking for meaningful progress based in concrete actions. (6/6)