US Army TO RECLAIM Nuclear Role? 

As Russia and China expand their nuclear capabilities, military experts now advocate for the U.S. Army to reclaim its historic role in nuclear deterrence with new theater-range missiles.

At a Glance 

  • Russia remains the primary nuclear threat to the U.S., modernizing its arsenal while increasing nuclear rhetoric
  • China is rapidly expanding its nuclear capabilities, creating a new two-front nuclear challenge
  • The U.S. Army retired its nuclear weapons post-Cold War, reducing non-strategic nuclear weapons from 7,000 to about 200
  • Military strategists recommend the Army rejoin the nuclear mission with mobile ground-launched systems
  • New Army nuclear capabilities would provide the President with more flexible deterrence options

Russia’s Evolving Nuclear Threat

A Congressional Research Service report published May 22, 2025, titled “Russia’s Nuclear Weapons,” details Russia’s enhanced nuclear posture amid ongoing Ukraine conflict and tensions with NATO. Russia currently maintains approximately 1,718 deployed nuclear warheads with a complete triad of ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and strategic bombers—maintaining rough parity with the United States. President Putin has increasingly weaponized nuclear deterrence as a foreign policy tool, issuing threats and suspending Russian participation in the New START treaty that limited strategic nuclear weapons.

Russia dedicates 6.7% of its GDP to defense spending, enabling comprehensive nuclear modernization including the development of the SS-X-29 (Sarmat) missiles, SS-27 Mod 2 (Yars) ICBMs, and Dolgorukiy (Borei) class submarines. The Russian arsenal has expanded to include advanced systems like the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle and Zircon hypersonic cruise missile, which pose significant detection challenges for U.S. defense systems. 

“If deployed, these systems would significantly complicate the detection and characterization of an incoming nuclear attack, thus hindering the United States’ ability to respond effectively,” said General Gregory Guillot.

Russia’s nuclear doctrine has evolved to include five specific scenarios for nuclear weapons use, including responses to ballistic missile attacks and conventional aggression that threatens Russian sovereignty. Moscow’s strategic deterrence now combines nuclear and non-nuclear capabilities with increased nuclear signaling since 2022. In 2023, Russia took the significant step of withdrawing from the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty while simultaneously enhancing its nuclear posture in Belarus, positioning tactical nuclear weapons near NATO’s eastern flank.

China’s Growing Nuclear Arsenal

While Russia has traditionally been the primary nuclear concern, China has rapidly emerged as a second major nuclear threat. Beijing is expanding its nuclear arsenal at an unprecedented pace, developing new delivery systems and constructing additional missile silos. The Pentagon has warned that China could possess as many as 1,000 operational nuclear warheads by 2030, a significant increase from previous estimates. This buildup fundamentally changes strategic calculations that have guided U.S. nuclear policy since the end of the Cold War.

China’s nuclear modernization includes developing hypersonic weapons, Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs), and solid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missiles. These advancements enhance China’s ability to penetrate missile defenses and conduct surprise strikes. The combination of Russian and Chinese nuclear expansion creates a novel strategic environment where the United States must simultaneously deter two near-peer nuclear powers—a situation not faced during the Cold War. 

America’s Diminished Nuclear Posture

Following the Cold War, the United States dramatically reduced its nuclear arsenal, particularly non-strategic nuclear weapons. The Army completely exited the nuclear mission, while Europe saw American nuclear weapons reduced from approximately 7,000 to merely 200 B-61 gravity bombs. These remaining weapons require aircraft delivery, limiting their effectiveness in contested airspace against modern air defense systems. The reduction occurred during a period when nuclear threats appeared diminished, but the strategic landscape has fundamentally changed. 

The 2023 Congressional Commission on the U.S. Strategic Posture recommended preparing for simultaneous nuclear challenges from Russia and China, with Congress now considering enhanced capabilities and risk management strategies. Military analysts suggest America’s current deterrence posture lacks the flexibility needed to respond to the growing nuclear threats, particularly in regional scenarios where adversaries might employ limited nuclear strikes to achieve strategic objectives.

Reviving Army Nuclear Capabilities

Security experts now advocate for the Army to rejoin the nuclear mission alongside the Navy and Air Force. Historically, the Army operated non-strategic nuclear weapons including the Lance and Pershing II missiles that proved crucial to NATO’s deterrence strategy during the Cold War. These systems provided flexible response options below the threshold of strategic nuclear exchange. Reintroducing Army nuclear capabilities would strengthen America’s deterrent by expanding the President’s options during crisis scenarios.

Military analysts recommend mobile, ground-based nuclear options including Ground-Launched Cruise Missiles (GLCM) and Ground-Launched Ballistic Missiles (GLBM). These systems offer significant strategic advantages over air-delivered weapons. Ground-based nuclear delivery systems are highly mobile, concealable, and survivable. GLCMs provide stealth and precision, while GLBMs offer speed and immediate strike capability. Intermediate-range GLBMs would be particularly suitable for the Indo-Pacific theater due to vast distances and limited basing options. 

Implementation and Strategic Advantages

The Army could enhance nuclear deterrence relatively quickly by making existing or near-term conventional missiles nuclear-capable. The Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) represents one potential platform that could be modified to carry nuclear warheads. Unlike fixed nuclear installations, mobile ground-launched systems can be forward deployed during crises, providing assurance to allies and immediate availability if needed. This flexibility creates uncertainty for adversaries and complicates their planning.

Restoring Army nuclear capabilities would significantly enhance America’s extended deterrence commitments to allies, particularly in Europe and the Indo-Pacific. The presence of U.S. ground forces with nuclear capability visibly demonstrates American resolve and creates a direct link between conventional conflict and nuclear escalation. As Russia and China continue advancing their nuclear arsenals and doctrine, reinstating the Army’s nuclear role represents a prudent adaptation to ensure America maintains credible deterrence in an increasingly dangerous world. 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR