What Are the Consequences of Resuming Nuclear Testing?
President Donald Trump said recently that he had ordered the U.S. military to resume the testing of nuclear weapons; Russia said it would “respond in kind” to any tests. We asked Professor Paul Bracken, an expert in nuclear strategy, what’s behind the posturing and what test explosions would mean for the world.
A nuclear test in Nevada in 1962.
Is there a strategic argument for the U.S. resuming nuclear testing?
What’s going on is very scary. Nuclear weapons of the major powers have not been tested since the early 1990s. Now there are signs the Russians may test a bomb. I think this would be for political shock effect, an escalation over the Ukraine war. Washington wants to deter them from doing this, so we threaten to test if they do. It is astounding to me, but possible, that nuclear blasts will be part of ending the Ukraine war.
The Western public sees nuclear weapons as a relic of the Cold War. Nuclear testing could change this mood overnight.
I don’t think the U.S. statement on nuclear testing is an out-of-the-blue threat; it’s a deterrent statement. If Moscow tests, so could the U.S. Currently, the U.S. does computer simulation tests, but nothing that has a nuclear blast. That could change.
What is the likely short-term response to the U.S. resuming tests—or talking about it?
The short-term response is scary. There could be a ripple effect and lead to China, India, Pakistan, or North Korea also testing weapons. All these countries have new bomb designs. Their scientists and military want to make sure they work.
The Western public is not prepared for this. They see nuclear weapons as a relic of the Cold War. Nuclear testing could change this mood overnight. I was in the Pentagon recently and was struck at the large impact the Netflix movie House of Dynamite had on people there. Nuclear testing would have far greater effects.
What’s the long-term effect on the strategic balance and the number of nuclear weapons in the world?
The long-term consequences are even more frightening. What the public does not understand is that the hydrogen bomb shaped the Cold War more than the atomic bombs used against Japan. Most people focus on the bomb in the movie Oppenheimer.
The kill radius of a hydrogen bomb is enormous, 100 times the atomic bomb. A single hydrogen bomb could destroy a large city. Hydrogen bombs are what North Korea, Pakistan, India, and others seek. Oppenheimer’s atomic bomb was simple; the hydrogen bomb is complicated, so you need to test it to make sure it explodes.
The hydrogen bomb has greater political and moral consequences. The Pentagon and Congress don’t understand this. It is a focus in my forthcoming book, The Nuclear Age and Its Dangerous Successors, which will be published by Yale University Press in 2026.