The debate over global nuclear disarmament has once again come under the spotlight as China categorically refused to join trilateral nuclear talks with the United States and Russia. Beijing dismissed the idea as “unrealistic,” insisting that it maintains only a minimal nuclear arsenal for national security and is not part of any nuclear arms race.
The United States, particularly under the Trump administration, has repeatedly urged China to participate in multilateral nuclear reduction negotiations. However, China maintains that since the US and Russia collectively hold nearly 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons, the primary responsibility of arms reduction rests with them.
Meanwhile, North Korea has also added fuel to the fire by issuing a strong rebuke to South Korean President Lee Jae-myung’s remarks in Washington, reiterating its refusal to abandon nuclear weapons, which Pyongyang calls its “state honor and dignity.”
This diplomatic deadlock highlights the complexities of nuclear diplomacy, the shifting dynamics of great power competition, and the growing risks of a new arms race.
China’s Position on Nuclear Disarmament
Beijing Rejects US Proposal
Responding to calls from Washington, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry made it clear that China will not join nuclear disarmament talks that currently involve only Russia and the United States. The spokesperson argued:
- Asymmetry in arsenals: The US and Russia possess the largest stockpiles of nuclear warheads, numbering in the thousands.
- China’s “minimum deterrence” policy: Beijing claims it maintains its arsenal at a modest level, sufficient only to protect its sovereignty and security.
- Unrealistic expectations: Forcing China into negotiations at this stage would be “unfair and impractical,” given the scale of differences in nuclear capabilities.
China’s Strategic Nuclear Doctrine
China adheres to a “no first use” (NFU) policy, pledging not to use nuclear weapons unless first attacked by an adversary with nuclear arms. Unlike the US and Russia, which have historically expanded and modernized their arsenals, China has followed a restrained nuclear posture:
- Its estimated 500 nuclear warheads are far fewer than the thousands maintained by Washington and Moscow.
- China emphasizes that its arsenal is strictly for defensive deterrence.
- Beijing has often accused the US of hypocrisy, pointing out that while Washington calls for global disarmament, it also invests heavily in modernizing its nuclear triad.
US and Russia: The Two Nuclear Superpowers
The Dominance of US and Russian Arsenals
According to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI):
- The United States currently holds around 3,700 nuclear warheads.
- Russia possesses more than 4,300 warheads, making it the single largest nuclear power in the world.
- Combined, both nations account for approximately 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons stockpile.
Historical Context of US-Russia Nuclear Treaties
Over the decades, Washington and Moscow have signed several bilateral treaties to limit and reduce their arsenals:
- START I (1991) – First Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty between the US and Soviet Union.
- New START (2010) – Currently the only arms control agreement still in effect, limiting deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550 each.
- INF Treaty (1987) – The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which collapsed in 2019 after US withdrawal, citing Russian violations.
The collapse of several agreements has raised concerns of a renewed nuclear arms race, especially amid strained relations between Washington and Moscow due to the Ukraine war.
Why the US Wants China at the Table
The United States argues that global disarmament efforts are incomplete without China’s participation. The Trump administration, in particular, sought to bring Beijing into the fold for several reasons:
- China’s growing military modernization – Beijing is rapidly modernizing its missile systems, nuclear submarines, and long-range strike capabilities.
- Geopolitical competition – As tensions rise over Taiwan, the South China Sea, and global trade, Washington fears Beijing could use its nuclear forces as leverage.
- Strategic balance – US officials argue that ignoring China’s arsenal could undermine the credibility of arms control agreements, as Beijing’s buildup could offset reductions made by Washington and Moscow.
However, China insists that its arsenal remains modest compared to the US and Russia, and therefore it should not be forced into the same category.
North Korea’s Reaction: Defiance Continues
While China rejected joining talks, North Korea issued a defiant statement directed at South Korea and the US.
- Pyongyang condemned South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, who recently spoke in Washington, labeling him a “hypocrite.”
- North Korea reiterated that its nuclear weapons are non-negotiable and form an essential part of its national dignity and state honor.
- Officials in Pyongyang stressed that any expectation for North Korea to disarm is unrealistic, especially while facing ongoing US military presence on the Korean Peninsula.
This stance reflects North Korea’s longstanding position—its nuclear arsenal is not merely a military tool but a political shield against external pressure.
The Global Nuclear Landscape
According to SIPRI and other nuclear monitoring organizations, nine countries currently possess nuclear weapons:
- United States – ~3,700 warheads
- Russia – ~4,300 warheads
- China – ~500 warheads
- France – ~290 warheads
- United Kingdom – ~225 warheads
- Pakistan – ~170 warheads
- India – ~160 warheads
- Israel – ~90 warheads (undeclared, but widely acknowledged)
- North Korea – estimated 30–40 warheads
This distribution underscores the imbalance in nuclear ownership, with the US and Russia far ahead, followed by mid-tier powers like China, France, and the UK, and emerging nuclear states like India, Pakistan, and North Korea.
The Risks of a New Nuclear Arms Race
Experts warn that the refusal of China and North Korea to join talks, combined with strained US-Russia relations, could push the world toward:
- Breakdown of arms control agreements – The possible expiration of New START in 2026 without renewal would remove the last barrier on US and Russian stockpiles.
- Multipolar nuclear competition – Unlike the Cold War’s bipolar rivalry, today’s world faces a multipolar nuclear race, with China, India, and Pakistan all modernizing arsenals.
- Increased regional tensions – Disputes over Taiwan, Kashmir, and the Korean Peninsula could escalate into conflicts involving nuclear threats.
- Erosion of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) – Growing frustration among non-nuclear states could weaken the global commitment to non-proliferation.
Conclusion
China’s refusal to join US-Russia nuclear disarmament talks underscores the deep divisions in global arms control diplomacy. While Washington seeks to expand the negotiating table, Beijing insists that the disproportionate responsibility lies with the two nuclear superpowers. At the same time, North Korea’s uncompromising stance reinforces the challenges of persuading smaller nuclear states to abandon their arsenals.
With nearly 13,000 nuclear weapons still in existence worldwide, the threat of a new arms race looms large. Unless major powers find common ground, the dream of global nuclear disarmament may remain just that—a dream.
