Putin teases new nuke deal ahead of Alaska meeting with Trump
The world's last remaining nuclear arms control treaty, New START, limits the U.S. and Russia to keeping only 1,550 long-range nuclear warheads on alert at any given time. It expires in February 2026, though Russia in 2022 paused and later stopped consultation meetings and ceased allowing the U.S. and NATO to inspect its nuclear arsenal.
But in recent weeks, Putin and Trump have both discussed the possibility of a successor deal. Nuclear threats have emanated from Moscow since 2022 when Russia started its war against Ukraine, which is the main topic of the summit.
More: Live updates: Russia predicts marathon Trump-Putin Alaska summit
Putin suggested the summit could create 'the long-term conditions of peace between our countries … and in the world as a whole, if we reach agreements in the field of strategic (nuclear) offensive arms control,' while speaking to senior Kremlin military and civilian officials at an Aug. 14 meeting.
Trump told reporters July 25 that New START's looming expiration is 'a problem for the world,' and expressed a desire to maintain the treaty's deployment limits. The president, who has long sought to reduce the risks of nuclear weapons, tried and failed to launch three-way nuke talks with China and Russia during his first term.
A golden 'opportunity'
A top arms control negotiations expert told USA TODAY the summit represents a major 'opportunity' to rein in a potential arms race before it begins.
Paul Dean, a former acting assistant secretary of State who oversaw arms control and led the U.S. delegation to the New START implementation body, emphasized that the treaty's enforcement measures also keep the world a safer place. Dean now leads the non-partisan Nuclear Threat Initiative's Global Nuclear Policy Program.
More: 'Heed our warnings': Nobel laureates plea for diplomacy to prevent nuclear war
The treaty mandates on-site inspections, data exchanges, and other measures intended to allow each side to maintain an accurate picture of the other's nuclear forces, he explained.
'Without (a high) confidence level in the day-to-day picture of what the other side's nuclear forces are, what you really get is the potential for misinterpretation and miscalculation,' Dean said. 'And when it comes to nuclear weapons, a misinterpretation or a miscalculation can be catastrophic.'
The U.S. and Russia (and the Soviet Union before it) have maintained a series of such nuclear arms control and verification agreements dating back to the 1972 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty.
'Most people alive right now have never lived in a time during which there were no guardrails on the U.S.-Russia or U.S.-Soviet nuclear deterrence relationship,' noted Dean. He argued that 'people have forgotten what the risks are,' including a potentially costly arms race. The 'world that we're living in is more complicated and more dangerous than it's been in quite some time,' he said.
More: Despite DOGE, Pentagon escapes Donald Trump's budget cuts unscathed
The presidents could agree in Anchorage to start the negotiating process for a successor deal to New START, but Dean cautioned that 'these are long negotiations and unlikely to be resolved in a matter of weeks or even months.'
But there is potential for some immediate progress to emerge from the summit, Dean said.
'Both sides could take a step back from nuclear threats and raising the nuclear temperature. Both sides could recommit themselves to implementing the New START treaty,' he said, and the two sides could agree to respect the deployment limits as negotiations unfold.
Contributing: Reuters
Davis Winkie's role covering nuclear threats and national security at USA TODAY is supported by a partnership with Outrider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Putin floats new nuke deal ahead of Trump summit in Alaska
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
5 minutes ago
- CNBC
U.S. delegation's India visit reportedly called off as trade tensions simmer
A scheduled visit by U.S. trade representatives to New Delhi later this month has been called off, according to Indian news broadcaster NDTV Profit. The visit that was expected to take place between Aug. 25 and Aug. 29 will likely be rescheduled, NDTV reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The report comes at a time when trade relations between the two countries have soured with U.S. President Donald Trump imposing a 25% blanket tariff on Indian exports, and topping those with another 25% duties — expected to come into effect on Aug. 27 — as a "penalty" for India purchasing Russian crude. Both sides are in contact with each other, but a new schedule for talks not been finalized, the report said. Trump's cumulative 50% tariff rate on India is among the highest on any of the U.S.' trading partners, and has drawn a sharp response from New Delhi. India has said it was being targeted unfairly, while calling out the EU and the U.S. on their continuing trade with Russia. "It is revealing that the very nations criticizing India are themselves indulging in trade with Russia. Unlike our case, such trade is not even a vital national compulsion [for them]," the country's foreign ministry said in a statement earlier this month. India's Ministry of Commerce and Industry, and the Office of the U.S Trade Representative did not immediately respond to CNBC's request for comments. The U.S. is India's single largest export partner, with nearly 20% of its overall exports, or $86.51 billion worth of goods, shipped to the U.S. in fiscal year ended March 2025, according to the latest official data. Read the full NDTV story here.
11 minutes ago
In Trump's redistricting push, Democrats find an aggressive identity
ATLANTA -- Fight! Fight! Fight! It's not just Donald Trump's mantra anymore. As the Republican president pushes states to redraw their congressional districts to the GOP's advantage, Democrats have shown they are willing to go beyond words of outrage and use whatever power they do have to win. Democrats in the Texas Legislature started it off by delaying, for now, Republican efforts to expand the GOP majority in the state's delegation and help preserve party control of the U.S. House through new districts in time for the 2026 midterm elections. Then multiple Democratic governors promised new districts in their own states to neutralize potential Republican gains in Washington. Their counter has been buoyed by national fundraising, media blitzes and public demonstrations, including rallies Saturday around the country. 'For everyone that's been asking, 'Where are the Democrats?' -- well, here they are," said U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, one of several Democrats who could be ousted under her state's new maps. "For everyone who's been asking, 'Where is the fight?' – well, here it is.' There is no guarantee Democrats can prevent the Republican-powered redistricting, just as Democrats on Capitol Hill have not been able to stop Trump's moves. But it's a notable turn for a party that, by its own leaders' admissions, has honored conventional rules and bypassed bare-knuckled tactics. So far, progressive and establishment Democrats are aligned, uniting what has often been a fragmented opposition since Republicans led by Trump took control of the federal government with their election sweep in November. Leaders on the left say the approach gives them a more effective way to confront him. They can challenge his redistricting ploy with tangible moves as they also push back against the Republicans' tax and spending law and press the case that he is shredding American democracy. 'We've been imploring Democrats where they have power on the state and local level to flex that power,' said Maurice Mitchell, who leads the Working Families Party at the left flank of mainstream U.S. politics. 'There's been this overwrought talk about fighters and largely performative actions to suggest that they're in the fight.' This time, he said, Democrats are 'taking real risks in protecting all of our rights' against 'an authoritarian president who only understands the fight.' Texas made sense for Republicans as the place to start a redistricting scuffle. They dominate the Statehouse, and Gov. Greg Abbott is a Trump loyalist. But when the president's allies announced a new political map intended to send five more Republicans to the U.S. House, state Democratic representatives fled Texas, denying the GOP the numbers to conduct business in the Legislature and approve the reworked districts. Those legislators surfaced in Illinois, New York, California and elsewhere, joined by governors, senators, state party chairs, other states' legislators and activists. All promised action. The response was Trumpian. Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Kathy Hochul of New York welcomed Texas Democrats and pledged retaliatory redistricting. Pritzker mocked Abbott as a lackey who says 'yes, sir' to Trump orders. Hochul dismissed Texas Republicans as 'lawbreaking cowboys.' Newsom's press office directed all-caps social media posts at Trump, mimicking his signature sign off: 'THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.' U.S. Rep. Al Green, another Texas Democrat who could lose his seat, called Trump 'egomaniacal.' Yet many Democrats also claimed moral high ground, comparing their cause to the Civil Rights Movement. State Rep. Ramon Romero Jr., invoked another Texas Democrat, President Lyndon Johnson, who was 'willing to stand up and fight' for civil rights laws in the 1960s. Then, with Texas bravado, Romero reached further into history: 'We're asking for help, maybe just as they did back in the days of the Alamo.' A recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that about 15% of Democrats' own voters described the party using words like 'weak' or 'apathetic.' An additional 10% called it 'ineffective' or 'disorganized.' Beto O'Rourke, a former Texas congressman who is raising money to support Texas Democrats, has encouraged Democratic-run statehouses to redraw districts now rather than wait for GOP states to act. On Friday, California Democrats released a plan that would give the party an additional five U.S. House seats. It would require voter approval in a November election. 'Maximize Democratic Party advantage,' O'Rourke said at a recent rally. 'You may say to yourself, 'Well, those aren't the rules.' There are no refs in this game. F--- the rules. ... Whatever it takes.' Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin acknowledged the shift. 'This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather, which would bring a pencil to a knife fight,' he said. Andrew O'Neill, an executive at the progressive group Indivisible, contrasted that response with the record-long speeches by U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J. and the Democratic leader of the U.S. House, New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, in eviscerating Trump and his package of tax breaks and spending cuts. The left 'had its hair on fire' cheering those moments, O'Neill recalled, but were 'left even more frustrated in the aftermath.' Trump still secured tax cuts for the wealthy, accelerated deportations and cut safety net programs, just as some of his controversial nominees were confirmed over vocal Democratic opposition. 'Now,' O'Neill said, 'there is some marriage of the rhetoric we've been seeing since Trump's inauguration with some actual action.' O'Neill looked back wistfully to the decision by Senate Democrats not to eliminate the filibuster 'when our side had the trifecta,' so a simple majority could pass major legislation. Democratic President Joe Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, he said, was too timid in prosecuting Trump and top associates over the Capitol riot. In 2016, Democratic President Barack Obama opted against hardball as the Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, refused to consider Obama's nomination of Garland to the Supreme Court. 'These unspoken rules of propriety, especially on the Democratic side, have created the conditions' that enabled Trump, Mitchell said. Even on redistricting, Democrats would have to ignore their previous good-government efforts and bypass independent commissions that draw boundaries in several states, including California. Party leaders and activists rationalize that the broader fights tie together piecemeal skirmishes that may not, by themselves, sway voters. Arguing that Trump diminishes democracy stirs people who already support Democrats, O'Neill said. By contrast, he said, the GOP 'power grab,' can be connected to unpopular policies that affect voters' lives. Green noted that Trump's big package bill cleared the Senate 'by one vote' and the House by a few, demonstrating why redistricting matters. U.S. Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said Democrats must make unseemly, short-term power plays so they can later pass legislation that 'bans gerrymandering nationwide ... bans super PACs (political action committees) and gets rid of that kind of big money and special interest that helped get us to this place.' U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, added that a Democratic majority would wield subpoena power over Trump's administration. In the meantime, said U.S. Rep. Julie Johnson, D-Texas, voters are grasping a stark reality. 'They say, 'Well, I don't know. Politics doesn't affect me,'' she said of constituents she meets. 'I say, 'Honey, it does' If you don't do politics, politics will do you.''
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump could trigger a financial crisis in Russia — if he wants to — but has backed off from his threat of ‘very severe consequences'
President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin ended their meeting in Alaska on Friday without a ceasefire deal. Despite Trump's earlier threat that Moscow would face 'very severe consequences' if the summit didn't produce an agreement, he said he would hold off on imposing new sanctions. But a tougher U.S. crackdown on tankers delivering Russian oil would cripple Putin's war machine, an expert said. The U.S. holds immense leverage over Russia's economy and ability to continue waging war on Ukraine, but President Donald Trump has backed off from earlier warnings that lack of progress on a ceasefire would result in harsh penalties for Moscow. Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin ended their highly anticipated meeting in Alaska on Friday without a deal. On Saturday, Trump shifted his stance toward reaching a more comprehensive peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine, mirroring Putin's position, rather than a ceasefire. He also reportedly backed Putin's idea for Ukraine to give up territory it holds in exchange for a Russian promise that it won't attack again. That marked a big swing from his rhetoric leading up to the Alaska meeting, as he threatened 'very severe consequences' for Russia if Putin didn't agree to a ceasefire. When asked why he didn't follow through, Trump said he would hold off on any new penalties and suggested the threat remains on the table as diplomacy plays out. 'Because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that now,' he told Fox News. 'I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now.' Trump had previously warned Russia's oil sector could face secondary sanctions. Oil and gas generate the bulk of the Kremlin's revenue, and the U.S. could exploit this critical vulnerability. In particular, cutting off the 'shadow fleet' of tankers that deliver Russia's oil under the radar would send the war economy into a 'deep financial crisis,' according to Robin Brooks, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former chief economist at the Institute of International Finance. After the Biden administration sanctioned nearly 200 ships in January, just before Trump returned to office, their activity collapsed, he pointed out in a Substack post on Saturday. But there are 359 more ships that have already been sanctioned by the European Union or United Kingdom, but haven't been targeted yet by the U.S. 'Sanctioning these ships would be a hammer blow to the Russian war machine,' Brooks wrote. 'There would undoubtedly be a sharp fall in the Urals oil price, reducing the flow of hard currency to the Russian state, and the Ruble would most likely depreciate significantly.' Meanwhile, foreign policy expects have called the Alaska meeting a success for Putin as he was able to avoid severe consequences from Trump while also buying time for his military to make more battlefield gains in Ukraine. But Melinda Haring, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center, also noted that Trump has significant leverage over Russia. 'Let's hope that Trump sees through Putin's endless appetite to talk and tires of the Russian dictator's pseudo-historical lectures,' she wrote in a blog post. 'Trump can squeeze the Russians; he seems to forget that the United States holds the cards, not Moscow.' Oil and gas revenue tumbled 27% in July from a year ago, and Russia is running out of financial resources as war-related spending deepens its budget deficit. The National Wealth Fund, a key source of reserves, has dwindled from $135 billion in January 2022 to just $35 billion this past May and is expected to run out later this year. 'Russia's economy is fast approaching a fiscal crunch that will encumber its war effort,' economist and Russia expert Anders Åslund wrote in a Project Syndicate op-ed last week. 'Though that may not be enough to compel Putin to seek peace, it does suggest that the walls are closing in on him.' This story was originally featured on
