Thread by @MalcontentmentT

To answer question one, does Russia have the funds to restart nuclear warhead testing?

Yes.

And if Moscow decides to do it, it will also mean that Russia will be moving faster toward the collapse of its federal budget.

Testing nukes is very expensive.

1/25

To answer question two, is Russia and/or China carrying out nuclear warhead testing as claimed by the Trump admin?

Possibly.

You can test nuclear weapons in a way that doesn't require setting off an actual multi-kiloton warhead, like North Korea has in the 21st century.

2/25

Some of these tests don't violate the moratorium treaty.

The US conducted three subcritical nuclear weapons tests during the Biden administration from 2021 to 2024.

The tests were conducted at the Principal Underground Lab for Subcritical Experimentation in Nevada by the NNSA.

3/25

The US has conducted at least 34 subcritical tests since 1997, following the 1992 moratorium on underground testing.

Most of these are done for calibration and to confirm that the aging plutonium cores will work as designed.

The first Trump admin carried out 3, and the Obama admin carried out 4.

4/25

These are small tests that don't create a full nuclear explosion, which would be detected by earthquake monitoring.

The shockwaves created by a nuclear test are distinct from those of a natural geological event. Underground tests, such as those carried out by North Korea, require years of preparation that can be easily tracked by intelligence.

5/25

US intelligence has warned since 2019 that Russia and China have gone beyond subcritical nuclear tests. This assessment was also shared by the Biden admin. Both countries vehemently deny the claim.

There's no public evidence that either country has done an underground test detonation of a tactical or strategic nuclear warhead.

6/25

To answer question three, does the U.S. have the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, as claimed by President Trump?

No. Not by any measure, but it is close.

Russia is believed to have 50 to 100 more "active" warheads, a larger stockpile of inactive warheads, and a larger stockpile of warheads awaiting scrapping.

7/25

Inactive warheads are a pointless statistic because there is no such thing as limited nuclear war, and there is plenty of firepower to end civilization as we know it using only the active inventory of the world's known nuclear powers.

No one will be around to restore the inactive inventory.

8/25

To answer question four, has the US nuclear weapons arsenal been completely modernized as ordered by President Trump during his first administration?

No. That's public information. However, the process is ongoing.

The US started replacing all plutonium cores in 2015 as ordered by the Obama admin. Today, almost all of the plutonium "pits" are +/- 30 years old. That doesn't mean they won't work, but they are reaching a point where the yield won't be as predictable.

9/25

The US is planning to spend approximately $94B per year through 2034 to maintain its nuclear weapons inventory. It will take between 20 to 30 years to replace all plutonium cores.

One of the reasons for the long ramp time is that the US halted all plutonium "pit" production from 1989 to 2001, overemphasizing the peace dividend. It is also a very expensive process, and unfortunately, for national security, there have been political considerations regarding which facilities received the contracts to produce new cores.

10/25

To answer question five, will China's nuclear arsenal catch up to Russia and the US within 5 years, as Trump claimed?

Sort of.

China's nuclear ambitions are surprising public, and the country does plan to have an active inventory of 1,000 warheads by 2030 and is currently production approximately 100 weapons per year.

That's about 65% to 70% of the US.

11/25

To answer question six, should you be building your background bunker and studying The Day After, Threads, Letters from a Dead Man (known in the West as Dead Man's Letters), and When the Wind Blows?

Are we historically closer to nuclear war?

No.

12/25

We are in a period of the highest global nuclear tensions since the 1980s, and a new low-key nuclear arms race has started. There are also several countries that have been vocal about restarting or starting their own nuclear weapons programs.

Additionally, Russia has, unfortunately, proven the theory of the Mutually Assured Destruction Instability Paradox.

13/25

Objectively, it is remarkable that the planet survived the 1980s, despite at least three known incidents where the world was on the brink of annihilation.

Read up on the Soviet reaction to 1983's Operation Able Archer and watch the 2014 documentary The Man Who Saved the World.

We are nowhere near the level of tension seen in the 1980s.

14/25

To answer question seven, should Russia's nuclear threats be taken seriously?

Absolutely not.

The bedrock of Russian nuclear doctrine is to project power using the fear of nuclear war. Moscow has made wild claims of wunderwaffes since the 1950s.

While Khrushchev was banging his shoe at the UN in 1956, declaring, "We will bury you," US intelligence already knew Russian claims of its arsenal and capabilities were pure propaganda. That continued through the entire Cold War.

15/25

To answer question eight, was the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine discussed in the Kremlin in 2022?

Highly likely.

After Ukraine's Kharkiv counteroffensive in September 2022 and the deteriorating situation for Russian troops in Kherson, Moscow considered using a tactical nuclear weapon. Our extremely reliable source told us in October 2022 that Bakhmut was the likely target.

16/25

To answer the last question, should support for Ukraine, or any other non-nuclear nation attacked conventionally by a nuclear power, be restricted or withheld because the aggressor is a nuclear power?

Probably not.

In the case of Ukraine, Russia's repeated nuclear threats have already been proven to be hollow.

17/25

Russia's nuclear doctrine is established. They use threats to project power. In the fall of 2022, Russia wasn't considering using a tactical nuke due to foreign support to Ukraine. It was because Moscow was facing its 3rd major defeat in less than a year, and its Battalion Tactical Group structure had been destroyed (remember BTGs?).

18/25

India and Pakistan had a limited border war that expanded into airstrikes, missile attacks, and drone warfare. Both nations are nuclear powers.

Ukraine invaded Russia on August 6, 2024, the ultimate test of Moscow's stated nuclear doctrine, and nukes were not used.

19/25

Iran has carried out a 40+ year proxy war against Israeli and US interests in the Middle East, and neither nation has responded with nuclear weapons.

Talks between Afghanistan and Pakistan collapsed last week with ongoing border fighting (talks restarted today).

Finally, India and China have disputed border areas.

20/25

The foundation of Mutually Assured Destruction has some cracks in it, but the fundamental truth—that there is no such thing as a limited nuclear war — still holds.

It is believed that Russia ultimately decided against using tactical nuclear weapons in the fall of 2022 out of concern for how nuclear-armed nations might react.

21/25

Conclusion:

At the end of 2025, the only thing happening is political posturing. Although President Trump's edict to restart proportional nuclear weapons testing is escalatory, we view it as necessary.

Moscow has used the threat of nuclear war since 2021 to great effect.

22/25

For the first time since the Reagan admin, the Kremlin is having to respond to a metaphorical middle finger. We further assess that Beijing is almost certainly displeased with Russian threats and wunderwaffe claims, pushing the Pentagon into having a renewed focus on its existing arsenal.

Moscow didn't respond with, "we will bury you," it responded with, "wait a minute, we didn't really mean it."

23/25

As long as the world's nuclear powers continue to believe that not only is limited nuclear war undesirable but impossible, you can sleep well at night.

24/25

What keeps us up at night is the fact that the Cold War architects, the Japanese atomic bomb survivors, the US Atomic Vets, and the key nuclear weapons decision-makers from the 1960s to 1980s are dying off.

What happens when no one who remembers the past is left to warn about the future?

People's Exhibit A: The Heritage Foundation published a paper on the topic of limited nuclear war on August 7, 2025, the same people who brought you Project 2025. It argues that limited nuclear war cannot be dismissed simply because decades of war games and scenario planning ended in total commitment.

Sleep well.

25/25

Clarification: North Korean nuclear tests were easily detected. Russia and China could have been conducting tests that don't produce significant earthquakes and other evidence.