SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
nuclear tests
The Perilous Norm of Nuclear Weapons Testing
Trump's testing threat is the latest episode of existential terror imposed from above, highlighting what depths of apocalyptic misbehavior are now considered normal when it comes to how nuclear weapons countries behave toward one another.
Nov 14, 2025
On October 29, just before meeting with China’s President XI Jinping, President Donald Trump posted on the right-wing social media network Truth Social that “because of other countries [sic] testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis.”
The US stopped testing nuclear weapons in 1992—that is, detonating nuclear warheads. It regularly tests “delivery vehicles,” the missiles that would be used to carry the nuclear weapon to its intended target. The most recent of these tests took place early on Wednesday, November 5, when an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was launched from Vandenberg Space Force Base, on the coast of California. It’s possible that Trump simply does not understand the difference between these two things.
Observers speculated that Trump’s nuclear test announcement was a response to Russia's recent test of its Burevestnik missile, which is nuclear-capable—meaning it could carry a nuclear warhead, though it did not during the test—and powered by nuclear energy. Some pointed out that it would be the Department of Energy, rather than the Pentagon, that would carry out a test detonation of a nuclear weapon. Trump’s use of the phrase “on an equal basis,” given that China and Russia are not detonating nuclear weapons, was comforting to some.
Whatever he meant, it’s worth considering how this latest episode of existential terror imposed from above highlights what depths of apocalyptic misbehavior are now considered normal when it comes to how nuclear weapons countries behave toward one another.
We should not let nuclear testing once again become part of nuclear-armed countries’ business as usual.
The missile Russia tested was designed to deliver a nuclear weapon without being intercepted by missile defense systems, using nuclear power to extend its flight time much longer than non-nuclear powered missiles. The Russian government also claimed to have tested its Poseidon torpedo, also nuclear-capable and nuclear-powered, and designed to be used in coastal waters to create a huge wave of irradiated water that would wash ashore.
Neither of these, nor the ICBM test, amount to a “nuclear test.” But, should the US conduct a test explosion of a nuclear warhead, it would be adding to the environmental burden that has led to nearly half a million deaths, by one scholarly estimate, from the over 1,000 test nuclear detonations the US has carried out. (This is about half of the over 2,000 total tests carried out worldwide between 1945 and 2017.) The health and environmental effects of this testing are ongoing, and the United States hasn't come close to cleaning up after its earlier nuclear tests.
To take just one example, waste from tests conducted in the Marshall Islands is still sitting in the Runit Dome, a cracking concrete structure on Runit Island in the Enewetak Atoll that is under constant threat from worsening storms as a result of climate change. US nuclear testing has rendered Marshallese ways of life untenable for the long term, with no real prospects for full remediation on the horizon. (ICBM tests launched from Vandenberg are aimed at the Marshall Islands’ Kwajalein Atoll, a less dramatically destructive but still significant burden on a place that has long paid a high price for the maintenance of US nuclear weapons.)
Still, even if Trump is responding to recent nuclear tests that didn’t happen, this is largely in keeping with how nuclear-armed countries tend to justify changes in their nuclear policy as reciprocal responses to unprovoked aggression, no matter what the facts are. What’s more certain, however, is that if the US tests a nuclear weapon, Russia and China are far more likely to begin testing nuclear weapons of their own, as Russia has already threatened. This would lead to more environmental damage, more health consequences across the globe, and more normalization of nuclear explosions as part of the business of doing politics.
It seems as if much of the press has lost sight of the actual stakes here. The Washington Post’s coverage of Trump’s announcement, for one, skipped over all the reasons a nuclear test might actually be undesirable and instead merely named "far-reaching consequences for relations with adversaries" as the real thing its readers should be worried about. If that is indeed the main concern, conducting multiple missile tests a year that signal the US’ willingness to use ICBMs should be viewed for what it is—a gesture that keeps nuclear war on the mind of governments around the world as a real possibility, a norm of global politics rather than a collective fate that must be avoided at all costs.
The reality is, Americans share the unfortunate situation of everyone else in the world of being first and foremost potential victims of nuclear weaponry, vulnerable to the whims of the leaders they have theoretically empowered to control the country’s thousands of nuclear weapons, nearly all of which are much, much more powerful than those dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Nuclear arsenals have been maintained using advanced computer modeling for decades. The fact that nuclear test explosions have entered even the far reaches of possibility, even for an administration which embraces brutal violence with such open enthusiasm, is cause for alarm and collective action against the threat that nuclear weapons pose to human life.
It’s easy to dismiss a “test” as something less than the full terrifying reality of nuclear weapons use. In some cases, this is true. Underground nuclear tests are less immediately hazardous to human and environmental health than atmospheric tests, which the US stopped conducting in 1962. An ICBM test does not involve the detonation of a nuclear weapon.
But the scale and political importance of a nuclear weapon test means any indication of a willingness to use it under any circumstances has political significance. Historians have noted that one of the main reasons the United States ultimately decided to use nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to test whether they would work as expected.
We should not let nuclear testing once again become part of nuclear-armed countries’ business as usual. A nuclear explosion is a nuclear explosion, and the fallout will be all of ours to deal with.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump’s Nuclear Testing Threat: Playing with More Than Dynamite
We have to hope that there is sufficient wisdom and leverage hidden in the cracks of the Trump administration to convince Trump that he needs to reverse course.
Nov 11, 2025
The thriller House of Dynamite, playing in theaters and streamed into our homes, leaves its audiences hanging as an unprepared US president must decide humanity’s fate after a surprise nuclear attack. Now picture the real president, Donald Trump, whose uninformed and garbled statement about resuming nuclear testing may have sounded the starting gun for an existentially dangerous multinational nuclear arms race. We can hope that those who may be able to influence this unstable and ill-informed president will devise a face-saving way for him to walk back the threat. But we can’t count on that happening.
In a recent track II session with US, Russian, and European former arms control diplomats, military officials, and analysts, there was something like a consensus that Trump misunderstood one or more reports about recent Russian nuclear activities. The claim is that either Russia or China conducted explosive, rather than subcritical, tests, a claim rejected by the head of the US Strategic Command. Not wanting to be out done by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump made his threat. When questioned about it, Trump reiterated the threat. This has caused profound uncertainty and confusion, leading the Kremlin to request clarification about US nuclear weapons testing policy.
Worth noting is that this brouhaha comes at a time when significant forces within the Republican Party advocate renewed testing. The Kremlin has yet to receive that clarification or another one in response to its offer to extend the most essential elements of the New START Treaty beyond its February expiration date.
Among senior arms controllers, there is an understanding that if the US or Russia resume testing, it will open the gates for extremely dangerous nuclear weapons proliferation. Among the candidates for a nuclear breakout are South Korea, where a majority of the population wants their nation to develop nuclear weapons out of fear of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and growing uncertainties about Seoul’s military alliance with the United States. Other breakout candidates include Saudi Arabia, which recently concluded a military alliance with nuclear Pakistan and near-nuclear Iran. Despite Trump’s claims of having destroyed Tehran’s nuclear program, Tehran moved its highly enriched uranium prior to the Israeli and US missile strikes against its nuclear infrastructure. And as history teaches us, knowledge is not easily destroyed.
In our various nations we can use our people’s power to name, shame, isolate, and insist on no new nuclear weapons testing.
While Russia is reported to be in a position to resume explosive nuclear weapons testing in relatively short order, this is not the case for the US. While the Pentagon could detonate a nuclear weapon as a show of terrorizing force, it would take several years to install highly advanced nuclear testing technologies into the Nevada test site. Similarly, nations that aspire to join the nuclear powers will not immediately be able to test these “weapons of the Devil.”
However, the seminally important Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which has successfully limited nuclear weapons proliferation and thus the dangers of nuclear war, will be at risk if Trump persists with the threat to resume nuclear weapons testing. Despite the US and China having yet to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, with the exception of North Korea nuclear powers have respected the moratorium on kinetic testing since the CTBT was negotiated 30 years ago in 1996. Fears abound that if Trump does not reverse course before the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, which begins at the United Nations in late April, he could torpedo the treaty. Despite the treaty’s double standards and failure to lead to the elimination of the world’s nuclear arsenals as prescribed in Article IV, the treaty remains a powerful diplomatic barrier to nuclear weapons proliferation. Dangerously, the last two Review Conferences were deemed failures for their inability to negotiate and issue a final declaration. The probability is that a commitment to resume nuclear weapons testing would sink the third RevCon.
In the tradition of three strikes and you’re out, a third successive NPT RevCon failure would likely doom the NPT, if not immediately then over the course of several years. In the mistaken belief that nuclear deterrence can provide national security, some states would withdraw from the treaty, become nuclear powers, and the resulting collapse of the treaty would “end the world as we know it.”
Where does this leave us? First and foremost, we have to hope that there is sufficient wisdom and leverage hidden in the cracks of the Trump administration to convince Trump that he needs to reverse course. In our various nations we can use our people’s power to name, shame, isolate, and insist on no new nuclear weapons testing. And with the NPT Review Conference approaching, we can organize to insist that the treaty’s Article IV commitment to nuclear weapons abolition, and previous implementation agreements, be respected.
Along the way we can remind people that even as we are enter and resist a new US-Russia-China Cold War, that arms control agreements between great power rivals can be negotiated, as was the case during the first Cold War. We can urge the US to join with Russia to extend the elements of the New START Treaty beyond the treaty’s February expiration. And we can join efforts to use the new Netflix film House of Dynamite to teach new generations about the existential threat of nuclear weapons and war and the reality that, as the Hibakusha teach, “Human beings and nuclear weapons cannot coexist.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Extremely Dangerous for Humanity': Trump Orders Resumption of US Nuclear Weapons Testing
"By foolishly announcing his intention resume nuclear testing," said one expert, "Trump will trigger strong public opposition in Nevada, from all U.S. allies, and it could trigger a chain reaction."
Oct 30, 2025
US President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he has ordered the Pentagon to resume nuclear weapons testing, an announcement made in a frighteningly vague social media post that threatens to shred decades of global progress and heighten tensions with China and Russia.
Trump mentioned both of those nations in his post, which was published to Truth Social just ahead of the US president's meeting with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping.
"The United States has more Nuclear Weapons than any other country," Trump wrote, inaccurately. "Because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis."
Experts and nuclear nonproliferation advocates quickly began trying to parse Trump's statement and determine its implications for the global arms race. It's unclear from Trump's post whether he intends to resume explosive nuclear tests—the last of which was conducted underground in Nevada in 1992.
Beatrice Fihn, former executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, warned that jumpstarting nuke tests would be "incredibly stupid" and pointed to the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which the US signed but never ratified.
"This would have real, devastating impact for Americans," Fihn said of explosive nuclear testing. "It will harm, kill, and poison people. It has been estimated that past US nuclear testing killed as many Americans as its bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki did."
"Even if such nuclear tests are conducted underground, this poses a risk in terms of the possible release and venting of radioactive materials, as well as the potential leakage into groundwater."
Daryl Kimball, director of the Arms Control Association, wrote in response to the US president's post that "Trump is misinformed and out of touch."
"The U.S. has no technical, military, or political reason to resume nuclear explosive testing for the first time since 1992," wrote Kimball. "It would take least 36 months to resume contained nuclear tests underground at the former test site in Nevada."
"No country except North Korea has conducted a nuclear test explosion in this century," Kimball observed. "By foolishly announcing his intention resume nuclear testing, Trump will trigger strong public opposition in Nevada, from all U.S. allies, and it could trigger a chain reaction of nuclear testing by U.S. adversaries, and blow apart the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty."
One Nevada lawmaker, Democratic US Rep. Dina Titus, vowed following Trump's announcement to introduce "legislation to put a stop to this."
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One after his meeting with China's president, Trump said details of the testing resumption—including the sites—would be announced at an unspecified later date. Just months ago, the US announced that it completed the assembly of the first B61-13 nuclear gravity bomb "ahead of schedule."
"We don't do testing. We've halted it years, many years ago," Trump said. "But with others doing testing, I think it's appropriate that we do also.”
Russia, which just days ago successfully tested its nuclear-capable Burevestnik cruise missile, has said it would only resume explosive nuclear testing if the US does so first.
China's Foreign Ministry, meanwhile, expressed hope that the US "will earnestly fulfill its obligations under the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and honor its commitment to suspend nuclear testing."
Trump's social media post is sure to heighten fears of escalating nuclear tensions and potentially catastrophic global consequences.
Manpreet Sethi, a member of the Science and Security Board at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, warned earlier this year that "the US has abdicated its role as a voice of caution" as "the risk of nuclear use continues to grow due to capabilities building up and treaties breaking down."
"It seems inclined to expand its nuclear arsenal and adopt a posture that reinforces the belief that ‘limited’ use of nuclear weapons can be managed," Sethi said just over a week after Trump's second term began. "Such misplaced confidence could have us stumble into a nuclear war."
Tilman Ruff, a board member of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, wrote Thursday that a resumption of US nuclear weapon testing "would be extremely dangerous for humanity."
"It would almost inevitably be followed by tit-for-tat reciprocal announcements by other nuclear-armed states, particularly Russia and China, and cement an accelerating arms race that puts us all in great jeopardy," Ruff wrote. "It would also create profound risks of radioactive fallout globally. Even if such nuclear tests are conducted underground, this poses a risk in terms of the possible release and venting of radioactive materials, as well as the potential leakage into groundwater."
"It's really an extraordinarily dangerous time in history," Ruff added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular