Russia has begun transferring tactical, or short-range, nuclear weapons to Belarus, prompting President Joe Biden to call the move “absolutely irresponsible” earlier this month. He’s not wrong. It is irresponsible to disburse nuclear weapons to other countries, increasing the risk that those weapons could be used by accident, miscalculation, or deliberately, especially with an active war nearby. The only problem is that the United States has been doing the same thing — sharing its nuclear weapons with its European allies — for decades. If Russia is being irresponsible, surely, we are too?
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told reporters more recently that Russia will not disclose the number of nuclear warheads it is stationing in Belarus, or inform the U.S. of tests of its nuclear-capable Poseidon torpedo. “For decades the United States has kept its tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of a number of European countries, and it never gives exact numbers,” Ryabkov said.
President Biden speaking about the Russian transfer of nuclear weapons to Belarus reveals the U.S.’s own hypocrisy on the issue of nuclear sharing: The U.S. has stationed nuclear weapons in Europe since the 1950s. At one point, we had around 8,000 nuclear warheads spread across several countries. Some of those countries, like Greece, ended the arrangement. Others, including Belgium, Italy, Germany, Netherlands and Türkiye, maintain arsenals to this day, far smaller than what was once stockpiled there, but still enough to turn Europe into a powder keg.
Moreover, rather than being “defensive” weapons, as they are usually described, these are first-use weapons, according to the recently deceased U.S. antiwar hero and anti-nuclear campaigner Daniel Ellsberg. They do not make these countries any safer and only increase the risk that nuclear war will start in Europe.
Why would President Biden expect that Russia should refrain from transferring nuclear weapons to its allies when the U.S. is doing just that? What is needed now is for the U.S. to engage in serious dialogue with Russia on ending all nuclear-sharing arrangements. Just as, during the Cuban missile crisis, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev proceeded to remove nuclear warheads from Cuba when President John F. Kennedy promised to remove U.S. warheads from Turkey, Presidents Biden and Putin should come to an agreement that both U.S. and Russian nuclear sharing must end.
Ending nuclear sharing would not only make the world safer, it would also remove one of the current criticisms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which is in a precarious condition. This historic treaty has been in force since 1970, and while it is one of the largest international treaties and can be credited with accomplishments regarding two of its pillars, so-called peaceful nuclear energy and nonproliferation, its prospects for enduring are dim.
The last two NPT review conferences, held in 2015 and 2022, have failed to produce outcome documents agreed upon by all parties, putting the future of the treaty in jeopardy. While many of the current debates about the treaty revolve around the lack of progress by the nuclear weapons-possessing states on nuclear disarmament, (the third pillar of the treaty), nuclear sharing is another point of contention. What does it mean for non-nuclear-weapons states to host the nuclear weapons of other states on their territory under the NPT?
Moreover, short-range weapons like those that Russia is transferring to Belarus do not fall under the terms of the New START treaty, which limits the countries’ strategic nuclear arsenals. President Putin has suspended Russia’s participation in the treaty — the last remaining U.S.-Russia arms control agreement — but both sides have pledged to continue to respect its limits. There’s also no treaty covering nuclear-powered autonomous torpedoes, such as Poseidon. An agreement to end nuclear hosting in Europe could be the beginning of a wider conversation between the U.S. and Russia on all of these related concerns.
It is time for the U.S. to admit that nuclear sharing is wrong and to negotiate with Russia to end all such arrangements. Reducing the risk of nuclear war, at a time when this existential risk is higher than it has been in decades, should be at the top of both countries’ agendas. Presidents Biden and Putin shouldn’t wait for their own missile crisis to do the right thing.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy