Donald Trump’s second term has not merely seen the continuation of previous trends toward nuclear proliferation but has witnessed their catastrophic acceleration, culminating in the outbreak of war in the Middle East. This conflict now casts an immediate, terrifying shadow over the architecture of global stability, particularly where the specter of nuclear weapons looms. This isn’t just about policy, but about a philosophy—or perhaps, an anti-philosophy—that has actively unmoored the world from decades of hard-won nuclear restraint. To grasp the full gravity of this unfolding moment, we must dissect the various currents flowing from the renewed Trump nuclear policy: a domestic agenda that carries global implications, the accelerating dismantling of crucial arms control treaties, and the now-explicit awakening of nuclear ambitions across critical geopolitical fault lines, exacerbated by the grinding reality of a Trump’s war of choice.
The Precarious Present: A World Unmoored and Ignited
The international landscape has become a tapestry woven with alarmingly complex threads, now stained red with the conflict in Iran. Since 2021, a confluence of events—Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, the escalating friction with China, and the enduring provocations from North Korea—has worn thin the established norms against proliferation. We now live in an era where the acquisition of nuclear materials and technology by both state and non-state actors feels not just plausible, but an immediate, desperate imperative for many. This is a chilling echo of our most anxious Cold War anxieties, but without its familiar guardrails.
Experts, gazing into the unfolding reality of Trump’s second administration and the raging conflict, perceive an immediate and profound wave of destabilization. The very framework of arms control, painstakingly assembled over generations, is not just facing an “extinction event” but is, in many respects, already in active collapse. The agreements that once served as crucial bulwarks against a truly catastrophic nuclear war risk are being systematically weakened, if not outright discarded. This isn’t a moment for casual observation; it demands a critical, unflinching assessment of where the Trump nuclear policy is already leading us, amidst the smoke and fire of a new war.
The Paradox of Power: Domestic Ambition, Global Peril Unfolding
Consider, for instance, the aggressive domestic nuclear energy policy being rapidly codified by the administration. Trump’s May 2025 Executive Order, building on Trump’s prior pronouncements, doesn’t just outline a vision but is actively driving the rapid deployment of advanced nuclear reactors—a vision of national security, energy independence, and technological supremacy, now underscored by the perceived exigencies of a wartime economy. This includes everything from fast-tracking reactors at military installations and designating AI data centers powered by nuclear energy as critical defense infrastructure, to expanding public-private partnerships and aggressively promoting U.S. nuclear technology exports.
Yet, this relentless drive for domestic strength is actively unleashing an insidious undertow of nuclear proliferation risks. An aggressive push for exports, notably less burdened by stringent regulation than in previous administrations, is becoming a more open conduit for technology diversion, subtly eroding the very global export control regimes we rely on. A renewed domestic embrace of fuel recycling and reprocessing, though framed as efficiency, is setting a dangerous precedent, actively undermining international efforts to restrict these sensitive activities. And a sweeping regulatory streamlining, enacted with a focus on speed, is inadvertently lowering the very safeguards designed to prevent unauthorized access or misuse of these most dangerous of materials. A quest for self-sufficiency, in this domain, is paradoxically sowing global instability with greater speed and less oversight, even as the global situation demands the utmost caution.
The Shredding of Treaties: Unmaking a Half-Century of Restraint, Completed
Perhaps the most visceral symbol of the Trump administration’s enduring impact on nuclear stability is its systematic dismantling of international arms control treaties. Joseph Cirincione’s observation—that the world is now engaged in a new nuclear arms race, and with advocates for stability in strategic retreat—resonates with alarming accuracy, made all the more urgent by the conflict in the Middle East.
Trump’s first term saw the withdrawal from landmark agreements, and his second term is now witnessing the consolidation of these actions, with profound implications:
- The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty: This Cold War cornerstone, limiting ground-launched missiles, is not just a historical relic; its absence has now fully enabled both the U.S. and Russia to field new medium- and intermediate-range missile systems, a chilling echo of the Euro-missile crisis made manifest.
- The Open Skies Treaty: Once a symbol of transparency and trust, allowing surveillance flights over military facilities, it too has been definitively abandoned, leaving a critical void in confidence-building measures at a time of heightened global tension.
- The Impending Fate of New START: The last remaining treaty constraining the long-range nuclear arsenals of the U.S. and Russia, set to expire in this year, hangs by the thinnest of threads. With the second Trump administration now firmly in place, and a regional war raging, the likelihood of its collapse feels all but certain, signaling the final curtain call for an era of strategic nuclear arms reduction and accelerating the destruction of the entire global non-proliferation regime.
These withdrawals, building upon the George W. Bush administration’s earlier abandonment of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, have, as one analyst put it, “shredded the security system so laboriously built up in the Cold War years.” This isn’t merely a lack of interest in arms control agreements; it is an active, continued discouragement, fostering an environment where nuclear expansion is tacitly, if not explicitly, prioritized, even as the risk of global conflagration increases.
Regional Tinderboxes: The Perils of Unilateralism, Now a Blazing Inferno
The geopolitical fallout of this approach has been profound, particularly in regions already simmering with tension. The most immediate and devastating impact is the ongoing war with Iran.
Iran: The Shadow of War Becomes Reality, Accelerating Proliferation
Trump’s 2018 withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), established a precedent that the second Trump administration has evidently doubled down on and which led to the current war with Iran. The immediate consequences for nuclear proliferation are stark:
- Iran’s Immediate Response: Faced with existential threat, Iran’s leadership will now view any pre-war restraint on its nuclear program as strategically suicidal. The war will undoubtedly compel Iran to accelerate its nuclear weaponization efforts, seeking a deterrent to guarantee its survival against external intervention.
- Demonstrated Vulnerability: The Iran war serves as the ultimate, horrific demonstration that non-nuclear status leaves nations utterly vulnerable to external intervention. The “lesson” for others is no longer theoretical; it is being carved in blood and fire: true sovereignty, true security, lies only in the possession of a nuclear deterrent. This is the main lesson of the Iran war for non-nuclear states.
- Regional Arms Races Ignited: The Middle East is now plunged into an unprecedented level of instability. This ongoing war will undoubtedly spur countries like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt to move decisively towards acquiring their own nuclear options, feeling directly threatened, or perceiving an urgent need for a deterrent against similar interventions or a nuclear Iran.
- Erosion of Norms, Complete: The war itself definitively shatters any remaining international norms against pre-emptive strikes and the use of force related to nuclear programs. It explicitly suggests that the non-proliferation regime is utterly incapable of preventing such outcomes, making nuclear acquisition seem not just rational but absolutely necessary for self-preservation.
- Failure of Diplomacy, Conclusively Proven: The failure to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue diplomatically underscores the perceived ineffectiveness of international negotiations and treaties in ensuring security. Worse, Trump’s incompetence and poor leadership undermined American credibility (to Iran, and to others) by launching the war while active nuclear and military negotiations were ongoing. This decisively pushes states towards a more self-reliant, “nuclear-first” security posture.
North Korea: Denuclearization, a Distant Memory
Despite the grand gestures of the past, North Korea denuclearization is now firmly relegated to a distant memory, further emboldened by the chaos elsewhere. While Trump cultivated a peculiar personal rapport, the stark reality of his second term is that North Korea has not only not denuclearized; it has accelerated its development and testing of advanced ballistic missile capabilities and continues to reaffirm its unwavering resolve to bolster its nuclear deterrent. North Korea now boasts an estimated 50 warheads and the means to deliver them—a significant leap since Trump first took office in 2017, and one that is growing even larger, with Trump’s attack on Iran serving as further validation of their strategy.
Saudi Arabia: The Gold Standard Tarnished, the Deal Solidified, and the Race On
Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia’s nuclear ambitions present another unsettling frontier. The Trump administration’s pursuit of a “123 agreement” for nuclear cooperation with Riyadh, which raised urgent red flags in its first term, is now reportedly advancing a 123 civil nuclear agreement that does not require Saudi Arabia to sign the Additional Protocol or meet the “gold standard” of forgoing domestic enrichment and reprocessing or to adopt the more intrusive IAEA Additional Protocol. This is deeply concerning, especially as Saudi leaders have openly mused about developing their own nuclear weapons should Iran acquire them.
The Fraying Alliance: Allies on the Brink, Taking Decisive Action
Trump’s “America First” foreign policy, with its capricious skepticism towards NATO, its unsettling suggestions of abandoning allies, its capricious trade wars, and its frequent denigration of partnerships, has profoundly shaken the global perception of U.S. reliability. In this second term, exacerbated by the ongoing war in the Middle East, it has triggered not just anxieties, but concrete discussions and potential actions among allies, leading to critical US allies nuclear weapons concerns.
- Europe: Allies, once secure under the American umbrella, now grapple with the unnerving reality of U.S. detachment and distraction. Serious discussions, previously speculative, have progressed in European capitals about tangible alternatives, with France and the UK actively exploring how to extend their nuclear deterrence to nations like Germany and Poland. The pressure from Russia in Ukraine, combined with the new instability from the Iran war, pushes this agenda with renewed urgency.
- East Asia: Here, the proliferation risk is arguably most acute, and now feels almost inevitable. Trump’s casual musings about Japan and South Korea developing their own nuclear weapons, once dismissed as rhetorical flourishes, are now being treated as a potential harbinger, and the ongoing war only intensifies this. Polls reveal a majority of South Koreans favor acquiring independent nuclear weapons, driven by the stark realization, caused by Trump, of perceived unreliability of U.S. security guarantees. Given South Korea’s advanced civilian nuclear industry, the path to weaponization could be alarmingly swift, and preparatory steps are reportedly being considered, with some voices advocating for immediate action.
- The Domino Effect: Should South Korea take this leap, it would almost certainly trigger a regional nuclear arms race. Japan, possessing a full nuclear fuel cycle and significant fissile material stockpiles, would feel compelled to follow suit. This cascade could then reach Taiwan, incentivizing it to revive its own, once clandestine, nuclear weapons program, creating an utterly destabilized Asia.
The erosion of credible American security assurances by Donald Trump is actively imploding the post-World War II security order, systematically dismantling the moral, political, and institutional bulwark against nuclear proliferation. The war with Iran has simply poured gasoline on an already smoldering fire.
The Erosion of Norms: A Jenga Tower Tottering, and Actively Falling
Beyond specific treaties and regional dynamics, the Trump administration’s actions have corroded the very sinews of the global non-proliferation regime. Trump’s cuts to non-proliferation funding, Trump’s dismissal of professionals safeguarding the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile, and Trump’s suspension of vital assistance to international inspectors, has worsened the crisis.
This “underinvestment in nuclear security” is imperiling crucial research, workforce development, and programs designed to prevent dangerous materials from falling into the wrong hands. Coupled with a persistent skepticism towards multilateral institutions, the Trump administration is actively weakening bodies like the IAEA, which relies significantly on U.S. contributions to safeguard nuclear material worldwide. The structure of international oversight is not just tottering; it shows signs of active collapse.
The Grim Sum: A New Nuclear Arms Race, Fully Engaged and Accelerating
The cumulative effect of the renewed Trump nuclear policy, compounded by the current war with Iran, paints a profoundly disturbing picture: a significantly heightened nuclear war risk, actively intensifying at an unprecedented pace. This escalation is born from:
- The volatile cocktail of geopolitical instability, the accelerated collapse of long-standing arms control treaties, and the active, destabilizing force of the war in the Middle East.
- The unchecked acceleration of advanced nuclear reactor deployment and export, unburdened by commensurate international safeguards.
- The proliferation of dual-use and AI nuclear technology, presenting unprecedented regulatory challenges.
- The unconstrained ambitions of high-risk states—North Korea, Iran (now in active conflict), Russia, and China—fostering intense strategic competition.
- The deliberate erosion of U.S. security guarantees, pushing allies towards the existential brink of their own nuclearization, stoking profound US allies nuclear weapons concerns.
- The growing worldwide perception that the United States under Donald Trump can no longer be seen as a stabilizing force for peace and democracy, can no longer be trusted, and cannot be relied on to keep its word or to adhere to international agreements.
The world is not merely drifting, but actively plunging into a new nuclear arms race. All nine nuclear-armed states are either expanding their arsenals or modernizing their weapons through aggressive nuclear modernization, and the pace is quickening. The architecture of the non-proliferation regime, once likened to a sturdy Jenga tower, now teeters precariously with every discarded treaty and withdrawn commitment. The demise of the New START treaty, almost certainly on the horizon, (it expires this year), will trigger a catastrophic cascade of new nuclear programs across nations, bringing the global non-proliferation regime to the precipice of collapse. The thought of resumed nuclear testing, openly advocated by some Trump officials, now feels like a distinct possibility rather than a remote fear, pushing us closer to an irreversible threshold. The election of Donald Trump and the war with Iran has moved the world decisively from crisis to catastrophe, with proliferation as its devastating byproduct.
The Path Forward: A Call to Intellectual Arms, More Urgent Than Ever
Mitigating these escalating risks demands a concerted, adaptive, and utterly urgent effort. The recommendations remain clear: strengthening export controls with enhanced end-user verification; deepening international cooperation with regulatory bodies like the IAEA and FATF; implementing comprehensive measures against proliferation financing; developing new frameworks for regulating dual-use technologies, including AI nuclear technology; and rigorously promoting the universal implementation of non-proliferation treaties.
Yet, the challenges are immense, and now, even more immediate and terrifying. The field of arms control advocacy is, by many accounts, weak, underfunded, and struggling to cut through the din of powerful corporate and ideological interests pushing for nuclear expansion that are now entrenched within the administration, all while a major conflict consumes international attention. Navigating this perilous landscape requires a candid reckoning with past failures, a profound re-orientation of strategy, and perhaps, entirely new forms of collaborative action among experts and advocates. Whether through the bold merging of existing organizations, large-scale coordinated campaigns, or leveraging the media to reawaken public consciousness, sustained, collective work is no longer merely advisable—it is existentially essential to chart a safer course through this new, dangerous nuclear age, before the window of opportunity closes entirely, swallowed by the ongoing war and its devastating global repercussions.
The window is closing. The time to act is now. A new nuclear arms race will not only leave America and the world far less safe but will divert billions (or trillions) of U.S. dollars away from urgent domestic needs that maintain and improve U.S. quality of life.
Dr. Beaux Bonhoeffer
Find me also @beauxbonhoeffer.bsky.social and at beauxbonhoeffer.substack.com
Leave a Reply