The world today stands at a critical juncture where history, power, and destruction are staring each other in the face. The expiration of the nuclear arms control treaty long regarded for over half a century as a cornerstone of global nuclear order is not merely a legal or diplomatic development; it is a profound question concerning the future of human civilization itself. The agreement that managed to keep the United States and Russia within certain limits even during the most tense phases of the Cold War has now become a thing of the past, and the vacuum left behind is emerging as a silent yet lethal threat to global peace.
It is no secret that more than eighty percent of the world’s nuclear weapons are possessed by the United States and Russia. The nuclear balance between these two powers, if not a guarantee of peace, at least served as a barrier against total annihilation. However, with the treaty’s expiration, both countries now appear free not only to develop new nuclear weapons but also to test and deploy them openly. The warning issued by United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres that under such circumstances global peace and security are facing grave danger is not a routine diplomatic statement, but a serious attempt to awaken the conscience of the world.
Over the past fifty years, developments in the realm of nuclear weapons have become far more complex and frightening than commonly perceived. Technological advancements have enabled the creation of weapons that are not only more powerful, but also quieter, more precise, and far more devastating. Many experiments were never publicly announced, much research remained hidden, and numerous capabilities were kept out of sight largely due to the constraints imposed by international agreements. Now that these restraints have collapsed, there is a growing fear that everything long kept under wraps may suddenly come into the open.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s threat to use nuclear weapons in the context of the Ukraine conflict is a dangerous sign of this new era. It is not merely a tactic of political pressure; it signals that nuclear weapons are once again becoming an active instrument of practical politics. On the other hand, remarks made by former U.S. President Donald Trump are still etched in global memory, in which he referred to a weapon capable of completely destroying Afghanistan. Although some dismiss such statements as exaggeration or rhetorical bravado, nuclear history teaches us that words can sometimes prove more dangerous than weapons themselves.
Another deeply troubling aspect of this scenario is that the list of nuclear powers is no longer confined to the United States and Russia. Over the past half century, countries such as India and Pakistan have also acquired nuclear capability. South Asia already burdened by historical disputes, border tensions, and political mistrust has now become a highly sensitive center of nuclear competition. Claims and counterclaims by both countries regarding new missile systems, advanced delivery mechanisms, and evolving defense doctrines indicate that the game of nuclear balance has become far more complex and unpredictable.
The core issue is not merely the number or strength of weapons, but the mindset that begins to view nuclear arms as a usable option. During the Cold War, the concept of deterrence dominated, aimed at preventing conflict through fear rather than unleashing actual destruction. In the current global climate, however, this boundary is becoming increasingly blurred. Regional conflicts, aggressive interpretations of national interests, and the weakening grip of international institutions are heightening the risk that a miscalculation, a technical failure, or political recklessness could push the world toward irreversible catastrophe.
For the United Nations and global powers, this is a decisive moment. A new nuclear agreement must not simply be an extension of previous treaties; it must be framed in light of current realities, emerging technologies, and the presence of new nuclear states. Transparency, effective verification mechanisms, and clearly defined consequences for violations are essential components. Above all, nuclear weapons must once again be viewed through the lens of human survival, rather than as mere instruments for the projection of power.
History repeatedly teaches us that unrestrained power ultimately leads to destruction. In the case of nuclear weapons, this destruction would not be limited to a single region or nation; it would engulf all of humanity. This is why Antonio Guterres’s warning must not be dismissed as routine diplomatic noise. It is, in fact, the cry of the future, demanding wisdom, restraint, and collective responsibility from us today.
If global powers genuinely seek peace, stability, and human progress, they must halt this uncontrolled march toward nuclear peril. Otherwise, history will once again ask why the world chose silence when the signs of destruction were unmistakably clear and this time, there may be no one left to answer.
Today's E-Paper