Washington’s efforts to draw China into a fresh trilateral nuclear arms control agreement appear increasingly unlikely to succeed in the short term, according to experts, even as the United States seeks to engage Beijing through upcoming high-level meetings. The push comes after the collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty last month, which had limited the development and deployment of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers.
The prospect of a new agreement, involving the US, Russia, and China, has been championed by the Trump administration as a way to prevent a renewed arms race. However, analysts suggest a confluence of factors – including a lack of trust, differing strategic priorities, and Washington’s broader foreign policy approach – are creating significant obstacles. The core issue, experts say, isn’t a lack of ideas, but a lack of political will from all three nuclear powers to meaningfully engage in negotiations.
A Lack of Initiative from All Sides
Thomas Countryman, board chair of the Washington-based Arms Control Association, described a disheartening lack of momentum during a recent online briefing. “I spot very little creativity or initiative in any of the three capitals, Washington, Moscow or Beijing, to pursue new ideas,” he said. “It’s very much about scoring points in an eternal basketball game with no winners to see who can blame somebody else.” This assessment highlights a broader stagnation in arms control efforts, where each nation appears more focused on demonstrating strength than on finding common ground.
The US withdrawal from several key international agreements in recent years, including the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris Agreement on climate change, has also eroded international trust and diminished Washington’s credibility as a negotiator. This, according to some analysts, has made it more difficult to persuade China to participate in new arms control talks. The Trump administration’s increasingly assertive stance towards Venezuela, Iran, and even questioning longstanding alliances, has further complicated the diplomatic landscape.
China’s Position and Concerns
China has consistently maintained that its nuclear arsenal is significantly smaller than those of the US and Russia, and that it is committed to a no-first-leverage policy. Beijing argues that it is therefore not in the same category as the two major nuclear powers and should not be subject to the same constraints. This position is a key sticking point in any potential negotiations.
“China’s nuclear doctrine is fundamentally different,” explains Tong Zhao, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “They see their nuclear weapons as a deterrent, not as a tool for projecting power or engaging in strategic competition in the same way that the US and Russia do.” He added that China is unlikely to accept any agreement that would limit its ability to modernize its nuclear forces, particularly given its concerns about US missile defense systems in the region.
China has expressed concerns about the US’s development of new, low-yield nuclear weapons, arguing that these could lower the threshold for nuclear use. The US maintains that these weapons are necessary to deter aggression from Russia and China, but Beijing views them as destabilizing.
Trump’s Approach and the Upcoming Summit
Despite the challenges, the Trump administration continues to push for a trilateral agreement. President Trump is scheduled to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping in the coming months, and the issue of nuclear arms control is expected to be on the agenda. Countryman suggests that even a simple argument from Trump to Xi about the necessity of China’s participation could be framed as a success for the administration.
However, experts caution against expecting any breakthroughs from the summit. “The most likely outcome is a reiteration of existing positions, with both sides agreeing to continue dialogue,” says Zhao. “A concrete agreement is highly improbable given the current geopolitical climate and the fundamental differences in strategic perspectives.”
The recent decision by the Trump administration to resume full-scale nuclear weapons testing for the first time in 33 years, as reported by the South China Morning Post, is likely to further complicate matters. This move, seen by many as a provocative step, could escalate tensions and make it even more difficult to restart arms control negotiations.
The Broader Implications for Global Security
The failure to secure a new arms control agreement could have significant implications for global security. Without constraints on nuclear weapons development and deployment, the risk of miscalculation and escalation increases. The collapse of the INF Treaty has already raised concerns about a new arms race in Europe, and the lack of progress on a trilateral agreement could further destabilize the international security environment.
The situation is particularly concerning given the ongoing tensions in other regions, such as the South China Sea and the Korean Peninsula. A renewed arms race could divert resources away from other pressing global challenges, such as climate change and pandemic preparedness.
Looking ahead, the focus will likely shift to maintaining existing arms control mechanisms and exploring alternative approaches to reducing nuclear risks. This could include confidence-building measures, transparency initiatives, and bilateral dialogues between the US, Russia, and China. The next key development will be observing the outcome of the upcoming meeting between Presidents Trump and Xi, and assessing whether it leads to any tangible progress towards a more stable and predictable nuclear landscape.
This is a developing story, and time.news will continue to provide updates as they become available. We encourage readers to share their thoughts and perspectives in the comments section below.
