Britain today made a significant turn in its nuclear policy. This decision has raised concerns about further triggering an arms race around the globe. With potential plans to modernize and expand its nuclear arsenal, the government is navigating a precarious landscape marked by increasing tensions among the eight known nuclear-weapons states: the United States, Russia, China, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel.
In the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the British government—now led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer—has proposed an aggressive integrated defense strategy. They aim to reintroduce air-launched nuclear weapons after a nearly two-decade hiatus since 2001. This move comes amidst escalating fears of nuclear conflict, particularly as Russia continues to raise alarms about its nuclear capabilities. The planned nuclear modernization program will increase the lifetime cost of nuclear warheads for four Dreadnought-class submarines by £15 billion. This inflationary adjustment brings the current estimated cost of the project up to £41 billion.
The global context underpinning this strategic shift is just as important. The United States weapons development program to counter a rising China over the next 30 years estimated to cost $2 trillion. In the same time period, China’s nuclear strike force has more than doubled. Perhaps most alarmingly, many of China’s missiles are allegedly targeted on Taiwan, underscoring rapid military mobilization as fears of an invasion increase.
This troubling new emphasis on nuclear capabilities in Britain raises serious concerns about its compliance with undertakings under various international treaties. The 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) mandates that signatory governments pursue nuclear disarmament “in good faith” as stated in Article Six. Britain’s critics say increasing the size of Britain’s nuclear arsenal, as he committed to doing, goes against that pledge.
Further UK leadership was called for by the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) in continued support of the NPT. These developments combined make this leadership all the more crucial. It noted that the pursuit of nuclear disarmament is not just a matter of diplomatic obligation, but central to global security.
“continued UK leadership within the NPT is imperative” – The Strategic Defence Review (SDR)
Yet for all of these worries, the British government seems determined to continue its course towards modernization. When viewed alongside the plans for the building of the Dreadnought-class submarines and their warheads, this represents a stark shift in strategy. It would further escalate nuclear tensions in Europe and across the world.
Russia’s military strategy further complicates the situation. As the IISS report admits, the country has created and successfully tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile. They’ve even already deployed it in combat against Ukraine. Such changes have increased concerns of a nuclear escalation and have spurred requests for stronger diplomatic efforts. Further, the New Start US-Russia strategic arms reduction treaty expires in February 2026. This new deadline casts further doubt about the future of bilateral arms control between the world’s two biggest nuclear powers.
Former President Donald Trump is not to be left behind in this competition, as he too proclaimed his wish to “denuclearise.” As the world’s major powers continue to strengthen their nuclear arsenals, experts warn that reaching this goal will be harder and harder to accomplish.
Britain is continuing down a course of militarization, and is poised to increase the number of nuclear warheads. More Americans than ever believe that retaining or expanding our nuclear arsenal does not make us safer. Arms control and disarmament are at the center of a growing crisis in international relations. Countries are formalizing and reconsidering their nuclear postures in real-time.