NATO's Atomic Silence

Indeed, there is not a single word on the end of the recently expired New START treaty, which constituted the nuclear security architecture for long-range ballistic missiles. There is no call to reconstruct a new legal framework to limit the nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia.
On February 5, 2026, the last bastion of strategic arms control expired. New START expired without the United States, NATO's principal ally, lifting a finger to renew it or initiate a new treaty.
Russia has stated its readiness to voluntarily comply with the treaty's quantitative limits (1,550 warheads and 700 delivery systems each) even after their expiration. This commitment, however, is strictly conditional on similar behavior by the United States. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reiterated that the moratorium declared by President Putin will remain in effect only until the United States also exceeds its limits.
Then there is another problem.
In fact, the other very important treaty on Euromissiles, the INF Treaty, has also lapsed.
So what?
Today, for the first time since the Cold War, the two major nuclear powers are operating without any legal constraints , without inspections, without transparency. The NPT Treaty is the last flimsy hold we have left. But NATO remains silent on resuming negotiations, just as the UN conference on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons begins.
How come?
It's important to remember the provisions of Article VI of the NPT, because it is a cornerstone of the entire Treaty. Article VI imposes the obligation to pursue negotiations in good faith for the cessation of the nuclear arms race , for nuclear disarmament , and for a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict international supervision . The International Court of Justice has reiterated that this is not a rhetorical wish, but a specific legal obligation to be pursued to completion. Yet, the conduct of NATO, and of the United States, which leads it, goes precisely in the opposite direction. Letting New START die without proposing an alternative is not a diplomatic incident: it is a refusal to negotiate for nuclear disarmament.
The Trump administration has let New START expire without a plan for nuclear disarmament. Indeed, the intent is to return to the nuclear arms race. Under Secretary of Defense for Arms Control Thomas DiNanno has said that the United States stands ready, if the President so orders, to expand current forces, diversify capabilities, and develop and deploy new theater nuclear forces.
“Theater forces” are nuclear weapons designed to operate in a regional “theater of operations” (for example, Europe, the Middle East, or the Far East), rather than directly targeting the territory of superpowers (such as the United States or Russia).
In other words: the White House wants a free hand to rearm without constraints. And NATO is passively submitting to the diktat, limiting itself to hurling accusations at Russia and China, as if Washington were a victim and not the main architect of the current strategic vacuum. This is a betrayal of Article VI because abandoning arms control is the exact opposite of pursuing negotiations to end the arms race. NATO, which even references the NPT in its statement, fails to call for a new treaty, effectively legitimizing Trump's stance, especially since within NATO , France wants to increase its nuclear warheads to assume the role of the power offering the European nuclear umbrella against Russia.
The NPT Review Conference, which opens on April 27 in New York, cannot ignore this scenario. If the non-proliferation regime is to survive, it must have the courage to call a spade a spade: Article VI risks being openly violated. And NATO's decision to remain silent on the end of New START is the clearest proof that the Alliance is no longer a guarantor of disarmament, but an obstacle.
NATO governments, starting with Italy, must be asked—during the weeks of the review conference—to break their silence and formalize the immediate start of negotiations for a new nuclear arms limitation treaty between the United States and Russia.
This is not the time for indifference. Without a treaty limiting nuclear warheads, the risk of a new, extremely dangerous nuclear arms race is more real than ever. Everyone must make their voices heard and take a stand to prevent nuclear warheads from increasing again and threatening the future of humanity.
Articoli correlati
Albert, International Bulletin for Peace and DisarmamentThe Japanese government authorizes the export of lethal weapons: farewell to pacifist principles.
A historic turning point that rewrites Tokyo's military role. From fighter jets to warships, Japan is preparing to supply international markets, breaking eighty years of obedience to its pacifist constitution. Meanwhile, the prime minister recalls the memory of Japanese war criminals.26 April 2026 - Redazione PeaceLink
Albert, bollettino internazionale per la pace e il disarmoIl governo giapponese autorizza l'export di armi letali: addio ai principi pacifisti
Una svolta storica che riscrive il ruolo militare di Tokyo. Dai caccia alle navi da guerra, il Giappone si prepara a rifornire i mercati internazionali, infrangendo ottant'anni di obbedienza alla sua Costituzione pacifista. Intanto la premier rievoca la memoria dei criminali di guerra nipponici.26 April 2026 - Redazione PeaceLink
Ma l'Europa balbetta e le sanzioni non arrivanoIsraele sta ottenendo ciò che voleva
Il Golan siriano annesso formalmente nel 2019 con il primo mandato Trump. Una zona cuscinetto in Siria estesa dopo la caduta di Assad. Il Libano meridionale sotto controllo israeliano de facto. La West Bank in fase di annessione formale. Gaza si sta svuotando.26 April 2026 - Jacopo Tallarico
Albert, Bulletin for Peace and DisarmamentUS admits attacking Iran on behalf of Israel
War on commission, the truth emerges. The US State Department has officially acknowledged that Washington went to war against Iran "at the request of its ally Israel." Legal adviser Reed Rubinstein made the revelation. International law experts have spoken of a violation of the UN Charter.26 April 2026 - Redazione PeaceLink

Sociale.network