On the same rake: how will the issue of nuclear deterrence change in the coming years
Nuclear deterrence has traditionally been seen as a key mechanism for preventing global war. However, the arms control system has been eroding in recent years. Key agreements either become invalid or simply cease to be respected. Many countries began to advocate the creation of their own nuclear weapons. Izvestia has figured out how the issue of nuclear deterrence will change, as well as whether there is a possibility of a new arms race.
More and more countries want to get access to nuclear weapons
Recently, more and more countries have begun discussing the issue of developing their own nuclear weapons. According to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), the European Union headquarters in Brussels have begun secretly working on the issue of creating their own nuclear weapons production potential. At the same time, the pan-European doctrine of nuclear deterrence is expected to be formalized.
The SVR also added that the EU's plans to create nuclear weapons are based on a "serious industrial and technical base." Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, the Czech Republic and Spain already have expertise in developing key elements of the nuclear arsenal. They have the necessary civilian as well as military-industrial potential to produce its components. In addition, German experts, according to Russian intelligence, can secretly produce enough weapons-grade plutonium for one nuclear charge in a month.
So far, the United States is providing Europe with a nuclear umbrella within the framework of NATO, however, statements by American President Donald Trump about a possible withdrawal from the North Atlantic Alliance and his criticism of the bloc's member countries are causing European elites to have more and more doubts that the United States will protect them.
If we talk about the capabilities of the European Union, France has nuclear weapons first of all, whose nuclear arsenal in 2019 consisted of 40 land-based ballistic missiles, 10 missiles launched from Rafale fighter jets and 240 missiles designed to launch from submarines. In March of this year, French President Emmanuel Macron ordered to increase the number of nuclear warheads and no longer publish information about how many of them are at the disposal of Paris.
The second European country that has nuclear weapons is the United Kingdom. The exact stocks of its missiles are unknown, but in 2021, the country's government ordered to raise the upper limit of the arsenal accumulation from 225 to 260 nuclear warheads.
Experts believe that European nuclear deterrence is unlikely to start working in the coming years. This is explained, among other things, by the fact that the nuclear forces of these countries today "are not able to independently carry out expanded nuclear deterrence, similar to the American one."
Among other countries that have started talking about creating nuclear weapons:
Poland. In March 2025, Prime Minister Donald Tusk declared that Warsaw should "take advantage of the opportunities associated with nuclear weapons." To do this, the country is negotiating with France to participate in a joint nuclear deterrence program.
South Korea. In 2023, a survey showed that 76.6% of respondents believe that the country should independently develop its own nuclear weapons. The share of those who admitted that Seoul could do it was 72.4%. And at the end of October 2025, Donald Trump approved South Korea's construction of a nuclear submarine. Experts then said that with the will and money, Seoul would get its own nuclear submarine and put it on combat duty in 7-10 years.
Iran. It is known that Iran carried out a nuclear weapons program until 2003, but in order to guarantee its peaceful nature, an agreement on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was reached in 2015. The US withdrawal from this plan caused Tehran to abandon the restrictions adopted under the JCPOA. Currently, the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) has no evidence that Tehran has nuclear weapons, but a number of Western countries, including the United States, say otherwise. Nevertheless, experts agree that Iran's accumulation of enriched uranium gives it the opportunity to create a nuclear explosive device within a few months.
Saudi Arabia. In September 2025, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed an agreement on Strategic Mutual Defense. Nuclear weapons are not mentioned in the text of the document, but both sides stated that the treaty "covers all military means." In addition, there are frequent statements in Riyadh that the country will acquire nuclear weapons if Iran receives a bomb.
Türkiye. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the situation unacceptable when some countries possess nuclear weapons, while Turkey cannot develop them. In particular, he spoke about the proximity of Israel, which allegedly has it and which threatens to use it. Ankara has also launched a program to develop a national nuclear submarine, named NÜKDEN.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
Japan. In December 2025, the Japanese government admitted the possibility of the country obtaining nuclear weapons, explaining this by the growing risks in East Asia. According to a senior representative of the Japanese Prime Minister's administration, who spoke with reporters, the need for such a measure is dictated by the fact that Japan "ultimately can only rely on itself" in matters of national security, faced with "the build-up of China's nuclear arsenal, the nuclear threat from Russia and North Korea's nuclear developments."
Avoiding contracts
Currently, most of the world's countries are parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which regulates the production and proliferation of nuclear weapons. However, it is increasingly receding into the background in the rhetoric of States seeking to have their own atomic warheads.
This was largely due to the fact that the nuclear-armed countries, which were supposed to gradually disarm under the treaty, are not doing so. Many non-nuclear-weapon States insist that the "nuclear club" does not comply with the requirement of the NPT on disarmament (art. VI). This, in their opinion, undermines the credibility of the agreement due to the fact that the conditions underlying it are violated.
A Conference of the Parties to the NPT will be held in April-May, for which Russia has prepared a report on the fulfillment of its obligations under the Treaty. It follows that the Russian Federation is fully committed to the goals of the NPT, including disarmament, but there are about 20 reasons why it is not ready to reduce its arsenals today. Among them: NATO's advance to the east, the US rhetoric about the possible resumption of nuclear tests, and others.
The German delegation at the meeting dedicated to the conclusion of the final settlement agreement with respect to Germany, which was signed between the USSR, the USA, Great Britain, France, Germany and the GDR, on September 12, 1990
The United Kingdom has submitted a similar report. It says that the United Kingdom is also committed to the implementation of the NPT, but it does not intend to reduce its nuclear arsenals in the foreseeable future (on the contrary, it is planned to increase). London explains this by saying that "changes in the security sphere have led to an increase in the number of strategic security challenges for the UK and its allies, including a number of nuclear threats."
Non-nuclear states see and hear this. Because of this, they are increasingly making statements about creating their own nuclear weapons.
Thus, it can be stated that at the moment there is a situation of strategic uncertainty and the likelihood of a new arms race is growing, which may involve many more States.
The SVR statement pays special attention to Germany. In this regard, it is important to note that Germany, like other European States, is a member of the NPT. It is also deterred from developing nuclear weapons by the 1991 Final Settlement Agreement with Germany (2+4 Treaty). Paragraph 1 of Article 3 of this document states that Germany "confirms its renunciation of the production, possession and proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons."
The rhetoric of States about other fundamental documents regulating the use of nuclear weapons is also becoming alarming. On February 5 of this year, the START Treaty, an agreement between Russia and the United States that limited the nuclear arsenals of the two countries, expired. Washington claims that the control mechanisms under the treaty were not reliable enough, but some of them can be used as the basis for guarantees in a possible new treaty.
It is also important to note the termination by Russia in August 2025 of the unilateral moratorium on the deployment of ground-based intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles (INF). The Treaty has made a huge contribution to nuclear disarmament and has been an important factor in maintaining strategic stability and international security. However, as the Russian Foreign Ministry noted, the steps of the "collective West" lead to the formation and build-up of destabilizing missile potentials in the regions adjacent to Russia, posing a direct threat to the security of the Russian Federation.
Thus, the absence of deterrent agreements and disregard for the NPT may lead to a significant expansion of the circle of nuclear Powers in the near future.
Recall that currently five states officially possess nuclear weapons: Russia, the United States, Great Britain, France and China. The unofficial nuclear powers are: India, Pakistan, Israel and the DPRK.
Physics is a complicated matter
Special attention should be paid to the development of technologies, especially artificial intelligence, which can significantly reduce the time required to create nuclear weapons. It reduces opportunity costs by reducing technical and cognitive barriers. States previously constrained by complexity may begin to consider building a bomb as a feasible task.
Although countries will need much more than a subscription to ChatGPT to develop nuclear weapons, its use in combination with other technologies can significantly advance countries in building a bomb.
More importantly, the creation of nuclear weapons still requires a developed industrial base. To do this, countries need, among other things, a good technical base, the ability to enrich uranium and recycle plutonium, as well as a rich economy and technical capabilities.
Germany
Germany already possesses key technological and scientific knowledge, including a well-developed research base in the fields of neutron science, accelerator technologies and materials science, which has both civilian and potentially defense significance. All this, as well as a strong economy, could allow Germany to move closer to creating a nuclear explosive device, but political constraints and public opinion make such a course unlikely.
Scientists also claim that Germany was a latent nuclear state in the past, but currently it lacks its own plutonium production facilities. Most of the previously available reactor designs were also not capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium. At the same time, Germany plays a key role in Urenco (a British company engaged in uranium enrichment for use as fuel at nuclear power plants). The German division of Urenco Deutschland is one of the main uranium enrichment centers. However, technically Germany has the ability to create its own bomb. Everything depends on the will of its political leadership, which actively supports the policy of militarization.
Italy
Italy was already approaching the creation of nuclear weapons in the 20th century. In the 1960s and 1970s, the country implemented its own program, including the development of delivery vehicles and research in the field of nuclear energy. However, the program was curtailed in 1975 after joining the NPT, as well as in favor of participating in the NATO nuclear deterrence system. In addition, Italy is a member of the G7 and is one of the largest economies in the world with a developed engineering industry and chemical industry. At the same time, the country does not have its own uranium enrichment facilities.
Japan
The country is economically and technically well-developed and has industrial potential. All this combined gives Tokyo the opportunity to create its own nuclear arsenal and its means of delivery in a few years, experts say. China even expressed the opinion that Japan could become a nuclear power in less than three years. They also stated that by the end of 2024, it had received 44.4 tons of plutonium, which is enough to create 5.5 thousand nuclear warheads.
Netherlands
The Netherlands has a significant scientific and technical infrastructure that could support nuclear development, partly thanks to an organization such as Urenco. In addition, Dutch universities and research institutes offer internationally recognized training programs for specialists in nuclear technology and nuclear physics who can contribute to the national nuclear program. This technological base opens up potential opportunities for the Netherlands to develop a nuclear program, although it is fraught with technical and diplomatic difficulties.
Public opinion polls on nuclear weapons in the 2000s and 2020s
The role of surveys in the use of nuclear weapons is not entirely obvious. Public opinion can shape the nuclear policy of States. If people believe that nuclear weapons should not be used, then they are unlikely to be used.
In the early 2000s, there was a persistent "nuclear taboo" in most countries. In the United States, it is noteworthy that public opinion correlates with destabilizing events, such as terrorist attacks, for example, on September 11, 2001. At such times, more and more people advocate using nuclear weapons, mainly for protection.
In 2007, the sociological firm Angus Reid Strategies conducted a survey among 6,000 random people in six countries: the United States, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Israel. He showed that more than 79% of respondents believed that nuclear weapons make the world more dangerous. At the same time, there was notable support for the worldwide elimination of nuclear weapons or the reduction of their arsenals. The respondents also advocated a ban on the development of nuclear weapons by countries that do not possess them.
Another survey conducted in 2009 showed that the share of the population wishing for a nuclear-free Europe exceeded 60%: in Germany it was 70.5%, in Italy 71.5%, in Turkey 88.1%, in Belgium 64.6%, and in the Netherlands 63.3%.
The situation has changed somewhat since then. If 14% of Germans supported the presence of nuclear weapons in Germany in 2021, then a year later, in mid-2022, 52% of respondents expressed support for maintaining or even increasing American nuclear weapons in the country. At the same time, according to the 2025 survey, 64% of respondents opposed the creation of the German atomic bomb, 31% were in favor of it. Another survey showed that 44% of respondents between the ages of 18 and 24 were in favor of Germany having nuclear weapons, indicating stronger support among young people.
A nationwide 2025 survey in Turkey found that 71% of respondents favored Ankara to begin developing nuclear weapons, despite its commitment to the NPT. Only 18% opposed this idea. The findings reportedly indicate public concern about the country's defense sector (air defense systems), as well as NATO's ability to properly protect Turkey in the event of an armed conflict.
The slippery slope to nuclear conflict
Nuclear Powers have repeatedly found themselves in the center of conflicts. Border disputes, sometimes turning into armed confrontation, have repeatedly arisen between India and China, as well as between India and Pakistan.
If there are significantly more countries with nuclear weapons, the risk of such conflicts will increase. With an increase in the number of such players, the system will become less stable: more participants — more potential stress points, communication is more difficult, and the probability of accidental error is higher.
Another consequence of the increase in the number of States with nuclear arsenals will be the weakening of international non-proliferation regimes. If more countries start ignoring or circumventing agreements such as the NPT, this could trigger a "domino effect" where States will seek nuclear status not out of aggression, but out of fear of falling behind on security issues.
Increasing the number of nuclear programs will require huge costs, increase sanctions pressure and undermine trust between States. The world may become more fragmented. Based on this, we can say that the massive spread of nuclear weapons will lead to increased instability throughout the world.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
