Trump says U.S. nuclear arsenal dangerously outdated now.
Trump’s move to resume nuclear testing reignites debate, exposing America’s aging arsenal and fears that decades of neglect weakened deterrence.
President Donald Trump’s announcement that the United States would resume nuclear weapons testing marks a dramatic shift from more than three decades of restraint. Since 1992, when the U.S. last conducted a nuclear test, successive administrations—Democrat and Republican alike—have relied on computer simulations and subcritical, non-explosive tests to ensure the reliability of America’s nuclear arsenal. Those methods, backed by advanced technology and scientific expertise, were believed to be sufficient to maintain a safe and credible deterrent. But Trump’s decision has reopened a long-dormant debate about the state of America’s nuclear forces and whether the country’s reliance on aging systems has gone too far.
Vice President JD Vance defended the move the following day, saying renewed testing was necessary to ensure national security. that we do that.” His statement sought to balance reassurance with realism—acknowledging that while the system still works, complacency could be dangerous.
Yet beneath the political arguments lies a deeper and more uncomfortable truth: the U.S. nuclear arsenal is aging, and not gracefully. Many of its components date back to the Cold War era, with only piecemeal modernization efforts keeping them operational. In recent years, senior lawmakers and defense officials have warned that America’s nuclear forces are in a troubling state of decay. Last year, Senators Roger Wicker and Deb Fischer wrote in The Wall Street Journal that the country’s nuclear deterrent was “dangerously out of date.” They reminded readers that for more than 75 years, U.S. nuclear forces have been the bedrock of American global power. “That stockpile has deterred conflict for generations—but that deterrent cannot be taken for granted.”
The warning is not new. Nearly a decade ago, a Pentagon review uncovered shocking lapses in the management of America’s intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program. One particularly infamous finding was that technicians responsible for maintaining 450 nuclear missiles across three states had only a single wrench capable of attaching nuclear warheads—a tool they were forced to ship between bases as needed. It was a striking symbol of the neglect that had crept into one of the most sensitive and vital parts of national defense.
Critics of Trump’s testing decision argue that restarting explosive tests could erode global non-proliferation norms and trigger a new arms race. But supporters counter that a deterrent is only credible if it can be trusted to work. With much of the U.S. nuclear infrastructure dating to the 1970s and 1980s, and adversaries like China and Russia investing heavily in modern systems, the call for modernization—and verification—has grown louder. Whether or not Trump’s approach is the right one, his decision has reignited an uncomfortable but necessary conversation about America’s aging nuclear shield, and what it will take to keep it secure for the decades ahead.