Nuclear race: the best way for peace?

U.S. Nuclear Testing, Trump’s Shift and What It Means to You and Me

3 Narratives News | October 30, 2025 (Pacific Time)

“Because of other countries’ testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis. That process will begin immediately.”

— Donald Trump, aboard Air Force One in transit to Busan, South Korea.

The United States, which has not conducted a full-scale nuclear explosive test since 1992, has signalled a dramatic reversal in yesterday’s announcement. As global attention turns to diplomacy, trade and competition, this decision opens a new chapter in nuclear policy, arms-control norms and human security. What lies behind the announcement? What was the philosophy of ending U.S. nuclear testing in the first place? And what happens now?

Context & History

From 1945 through September 23, 1992, the U.S. conducted more than 1,000 nuclear explosive tests, atmospheric, underground and in international test zones. On October 2, 1992, President George H.W. Bush announced a nine-month moratorium, and this became a long-term U.S. policy of no full-scale nuclear testing.

The moratorium was supported by legislation, such as the Nuclear Testing Moratorium Act, and bills H.R. 3636 and S. 2064, introduced in Congress in 1991–92. The policy change reflected the end of the Cold War, diplomatic efforts to curb nuclear proliferation, growing public health and environmental concerns from past test fallout, and the belief that further testing was no longer essential for deterrence.

The architecture of that strategy later included signing (though not ratifying) the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996 under President Bill Clinton, and adopting a “stockpile stewardship” model that maintains nuclear forces by simulation and sub-critical experiments rather than full blasts.

Significance	Country	Name	Date	Yield
First plutonium test	United States	Trinity	July 16, 1945	25 kt
First implosion test
First uranium bomb	United States	Atomic bombing of Hiroshima	August 6, 1945	15 kt
First gun-type bomb
First thermonuclear boosting	United States	Greenhouse George	May 8, 1951	225 kt
First underground test	United States	Buster–Jangle Uncle	November 29, 1951	1.2 kt
First Teller-Ulam test	United States	Ivy Mike	November 1, 1952	10.4 Mt
First cryogenic deuterium test
Most recent atmospheric test	China	1980 Chinese nuclear test	October 16, 1980	1 Mt
Most recent test	North Korea	2017 North Korean nuclear test	September 3, 2017	50–300 kt

Narrative 1 — The Leverage

“Look — for years we played by the rules while others cheated. Signing treaties, holding back testing, while Russia drills and China digs tunnels. Enough. I’ve told the Department of War: we will test our nuclear weapons on an equal basis. This isn’t aggression — it’s fairness.

We have the largest arsenal in the world. That fact alone doesn’t ensure respect; only action does. When you test, you show you mean what you say. When you test, adversaries hesitate. When you test, allies know you’ll defend them.

My doctrine: peace through dominance. Not because I love bombs, but because I want wars to be prevented. Strength is the greatest deterrent. If the U.S. leads visibly, the world follows. The moment others see us stepping back, they move forward.

So we’re recalibrating. Testing is not just a blast underground, it’s a signal aboveground: we are credible. We are ready. We are not naive.

Other countries tested. We didn’t. Now we will. Because fairness isn’t giving up the advantage — it’s maintaining it.” Source: Reuters

Narrative 2 — The Arms-Race & Risk View

“I believe that there is a greater power in the world than the evil power of military force, of nuclear bombs — there is the power of good, of morality, of common decency.”

— Linus Pauling, Nobel Laureate and longtime campaigner against nuclear-weapons testing.

Viewed through a different lens, restarting nuclear testing is the undoing of decades of arms-control progress. Critics warn the move could trigger a dangerous cascade: states feel compelled to test, treaties weaken, verification becomes harder, and environmental risks rise.

Since the U.S. halted full-scale testing in 1992, norms had developed around no-explosive-tests, with most nuclear states honouring the moratorium, the exception being North Korea, which has resumed tests since 2006. Experts say the U.S. decision may undo this norm, pushing the world toward a second Cold War-style arms race.

Moreover, the past teaches that nuclear tests carried long-term health, environmental and social costs: fallout, radiation exposure, and lingering contamination. The moratorium was as much about managing human risk as about politics.

Narrative 3 — The Silent Story

Trump’s theory is clear: strength, shown openly, keeps war away. Many citizens, especially in allied countries, will welcome visible U.S. power if it means North Korea, Russia or China pause before escalating. But others will remember why 1992 mattered: stopping tests was a way to put human health, the environment and a measure of restraint above the daily contest of great powers.

Funding for nuclear infrastructure often means less money for schools, health care and climate mitigation. A shift in testing policy raises remote risks for remote communities, but also global risks for all: accidents, miscalculations and proliferation. When a superpower resumes testing, the ripple touches us quietly through policy, economy, environment and psyche.

So the silent question is not “Is Trump right?” or “Are the critics right?” It is: which cost do we want to carry, the cost of visible strength or the cost of renewed nuclear competition? That choice belongs to citizens, not only to presidents.

Key Takeaways

• The U.S. has not conducted a full-scale nuclear explosive test since 1992, after the end of the Cold War and the adoption of a moratorium.
• President Trump’s October 29, 2025 announcement signals a formal policy change: the U.S. will resume nuclear-weapons testing “on an equal basis” with Russia and China.
• From one perspective, the decision boosts U.S. leverage and signals renewed global ambition. From another, it risks arms-race dynamics, treaty erosion and new safety hazards.
• For everyday citizens, the implications are subtle but serious: renewed testing affects budgets, environmental safety, global security norms and the shape of future diplomacy.

Questions This Article Answers

1. Why did the U.S. stop nuclear-weapons testing after 1992?
2. What does resuming nuclear testing mean in practical and symbolic terms?
3. Which countries currently test nuclear weapons, and how does the U.S. announcement affect them?
4. What are the risks and benefits of restarting nuclear tests?
5. How does this change affect people who are not in government or defence?

Related coverage: Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions — Tulsi Gabbard Nuclear Warning our earlier piece on global nuclear states and testing history.