In mid-to-late October, NATO conducted its annual Steadfast Noon nuclear exercise. Almost simultaneously, Russia held a full nuclear triad drill to test the readiness of its nuclear deterrent. These parallel exercises have further complicated and destabilized the already fragile landscape of global arms control.
NATO pushes forward with its Nuclear Sharing Arrangements
Although NATO repeatedly emphasized that the Steadfast Noon nuclear exercise was unrelated to any real-world event, the timing and scope of the drills clearly reflect the tense security environment between Russia and Europe and reveal NATO's deepening "nuclear sharing" mindset.
The confrontational posture is becoming increasingly pronounced. In recent years, NATO has justified the intensification of its nuclear exercises by citing exacerbating external threats. This year's Steadfast Noon nuclear exercise simulated the entire process of a nuclear strike mission, with a particular focus on enhancing the protection of nuclear weapon storage and transport sites.
Multidimensional coordination becomes more frequent. A defining feature of NATO's Steadfast Noon nuclear exercise lies in the growing integration between nuclear and conventional deterrence. The exercise made full use of multiple military bases across the Netherlands, Belgium, the United Kingdom, and Denmark for coordinated deployment, reflecting NATO's continued efforts to extend and integrate its nuclear deterrence posture northward toward Russia and the Arctic.
Multiple parties engage in intense and complex contest
Recently, various parties have engaged in intricate and concentrated interactions and competitions concerning nuclear weapons development, deployment, and adjustments to nuclear policies.
The US has accelerated the development of low-yield tactical nuclear weapons. Since May this year, the US has begun mass-producing the new B61-13 tactical nuclear bomb. In addition to retaining controllable yield characteristics, it also features so-called "conventional weapon effects", including low radioactive fallout and a short half-life. This not only provides a new option for the US nuclear deterrence "toolbox" but also increasingly blurs the boundaries of nuclear warfare.
Russia has taken countermeasures by conducting nuclear deterrence exercises and updating its nuclear deterrence policies. During NATO's Steadfast Noon nuclear exercise, Russia held a full nuclear triad drill to fully test its nuclear readiness. In November last year, Russia updated the Fundamentals of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence, further lowering the threshold for nuclear weapon use. Russia's nuclear capability development safeguards its national security while simultaneously fueling the ongoing escalation of tensions between the two sides.
Facing Russia's nuclear deterrence signals and the uncertainty of US nuclear policy, NATO's European members are turning to strengthen their own nuclear deterrence capabilities. On one hand, European nuclear-armed states are continuously enhancing their nuclear posture. On the other hand, non-nuclear European countries increasingly rely on nuclear capabilities for security guarantees. However, Europe's pursuit of "nuclear autonomy" faces multiple challenges, including funding and technological constraints, and the US-led NATO nuclear framework is unlikely to be fundamentally altered by individual states' initiatives. Europe's efforts to bolster its nuclear capabilities will further intensify strategic tensions with Russia, exacerbating the continent's security dilemma.
International strategic trust is eroded
The frequent release of nuclear deterrence signals by various parties has led to a decline in international strategic trust, continuously impacting the global arms control.
It would trigger large-scale nuclear arms races. Nuclear actions conducted by NATO and Russia under the pretext of "routine" or "defensive" operations are perceived as provocative deterrence by the other side, significantly reducing the room for communication and confidence-building during crises, and thereby intensifying the nuclear arms race.
It would increase regional nuclear conflict risks. Nuclear exercises conducted near borders, like Steadfast Noon, are highly prone to miscalculation, raising the risk of nuclear confrontation. In fact, NATO has long been preparing for "surgical" low-yield nuclear strikes against adversaries, with potential targets extending beyond Russia.
At present, the global nuclear arms control faces severe challenges. The future of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) remains uncertain, and the extension of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) looks unlikely. Great power nuclear competition has seriously undermined the authority and effectiveness of the international arms control regime, exposing the international community to a complex and severe nuclear proliferation landscape.
(The author is from the PLA Academy of Military Sciences)