Washington — President Donald Trump has reaffirmed his commitment to a sweeping vision of global denuclearization, calling for the world’s three largest nuclear powers the United States, Russia, and China to drastically reduce their arsenals.
Trump said he has personally discussed the idea with both President Xi Jinping and President Vladimir Putin, insisting that all sides share a desire to redirect military spending toward “things that can benefit people now.”
While framed as a pragmatic step toward global peace, experts view this trilateral denuclearization goal as highly ambitious and deeply impractical in the near term.
The Core “Doctrine”: Peace Through Strength and Denuclearization
Trump described denuclearization as the cornerstone of his foreign policy doctrine, arguing there is “no need” for the massive nuclear stockpiles currently maintained by the major powers.
He emphasized that the U.S. could “blow up the world 150 times,” framing disarmament as both a moral imperative and a budgetary necessity. The former president linked this to his long-standing strategy of “peace through strength,” suggesting that America’s rebuilt military enables him to pursue global peace from a position of confidence.
“Everybody would like to spend all of that money on other things,” Trump said, underscoring the potential economic and humanitarian benefits of a reduced nuclear posture.
China: The Greatest Obstacle
The most formidable challenge to Trump’s vision is China’s firm refusal to join any nuclear arms control talks. Beijing maintains that its arsenal estimated at 500–600 warheads is far smaller than those of the U.S. and Russia, making parity-based reductions unfair.
Chinese officials have repeatedly stated that participation would be “neither reasonable nor realistic” until Washington and Moscow make deeper cuts to their much larger stockpiles.
Meanwhile, Trump warned that China is “working overtime” on nuclear weapons development and could “be even in four or five years.”
While this claim exaggerates current intelligence estimates, experts agree that China is undertaking the fastest nuclear buildup in its history, potentially reaching 1,000 operational warheads by 2030 and perhaps 1,500 by 2035 , a trajectory that amplifies global concern over strategic stability.
The Looming Threat of an Arms Race
Trump continues to portray the United States as “number one” in nuclear capability, followed by Russia and then China, but analysts warn that this hierarchy is becoming less stable.
Beijing’s rapid modernization, combined with deteriorating U.S.-Russia relations, raises fears of a three-way nuclear competition. Without renewed diplomacy, the erosion of existing treaties could trigger an accelerating arms race involving advanced missile systems, hypersonic weapons, and nuclear-capable drones.
Feasibility and the New START Deadline
The last remaining major arms control accord, the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), is set to expire in February 2026. Its fate looms large over Trump’s denuclearization rhetoric.
Diplomatic experts cite two primary obstacles:
-
Russia’s Conditions – Moscow has tied any new negotiations to broader geopolitical concessions, including an end to Western military aid for Ukraine and the inclusion of France and the United Kingdom in future agreements.
-
Lack of Precedent – A trilateral treaty involving three nuclear rivals with vastly different arsenal sizes, doctrines, and verification systems has no historical precedent, making it extraordinarily complex to negotiate or enforce.
Given these realities, experts say a comprehensive three-party disarmament deal before 2026 is impossible.
The Realistic Path Forward
Rather than pursuing an all-encompassing trilateral pact, most arms control advocates argue for a step-by-step approach:
- Bilateral Focus First: Extend or replace the New START Treaty between Washington and Moscow to preserve transparency and verification measures.
- Confidence-Building Measures: Use that framework as a foundation for future dialogue with Beijing, aiming to promote restraint rather than immediate parity.
- Incremental Arms Control: Encourage limited, verifiable reductions and crisis communication channels to prevent escalation and miscalculation.
The Bottom Line
Trump’s “denuclearization doctrine” blends idealism and strategic pragmatism, appealing to a global desire for peace while confronting the realities of nuclear rivalry and national interests.
Yet, without trust, verification mechanisms, and political compromise, his “trilateral nuclear dream” remains more aspiration than agenda. With the New START expiration fast approaching and great-power tensions on the rise, the immediate challenge may not be achieving total disarmament but preventing a new nuclear arms race altogether.
0 Comments