TL;DR
- New START, the last remaining US-Russia nuclear treaty, expires February 5, 2026 - three weeks away
- Putin offered in September 2024 to maintain missile limits for another year if the US reciprocates; no formal US response has come
- Since 2002, the entire arms control architecture has been dismantled: ABM Treaty (2002), INF Treaty (2019), Open Skies (2020), and now New START
- Ray McGovern, who helped negotiate SALT treaties and briefed Presidents Nixon through Reagan, warns this creates escalation pressure
- Putin is exercising remarkable restraint despite provocations; whether Trump can respond constructively is the key question
Introduction
Ray McGovern is 86 years old. He has spent 63 years studying Russia - first academically beginning in 1959, then professionally with the CIA from 1963. He chaired National Intelligence Estimates, prepared the President’s Daily Brief, and for four years briefed Reagan’s cabinet one-on-one each morning.
He was in Moscow in May 1972 for the signing of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. He watched his analysis help convince Reagan that Gorbachev was “the real deal.” He saw arms control work.
Now he watches it all collapse.
The Architecture That Kept Us Alive
The ABM Treaty (1972)
In May 1972, the United States and Soviet Union signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in Moscow. McGovern was there.
The logic was elegant: both sides had enough nuclear weapons to destroy each other several times over. If either side built effective missile defenses, it might be tempted to launch a first strike, confident it could survive retaliation. By limiting defensive systems to two sites (later one), neither side could afford that gamble.
The INF Treaty (1987)
When Gorbachev told Reagan that both sides were wasting money on intermediate-range missiles, Reagan asked his advisers: Do we need them for deterrence? No. We built them because defense contractors made money.
Reagan agreed to destroy an entire class of weapons. The Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty eliminated all ground-launched missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers.
The Destruction
2002: The Bush administration withdrew from the ABM Treaty.
2019: The Trump administration, advised by John Bolton, withdrew from the INF Treaty.
2020: The Trump administration withdrew from Open Skies.
2026: New START expires February 5.
The Last Treaty Standing
On September 22, 2024, Putin made a formal offer:
“We offer to abide by those constraints for yet another year even though the treaty expires, if the US will act likewise.”
As of January 2026, no formal US response has come. Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov publicly pleaded: “Please, will you give us something official on that?”
February 5 is three weeks away.
Russia’s Response
In 2018, Putin demonstrated six new weapon systems at his State of the Union address. Five are now operational, including hypersonic missiles and nuclear-powered torpedoes.
The Russians warned this would happen. Now they are prepared.
What Putin Is Watching
McGovern believes Putin is conducting two litmus tests of Trump:
Test 1: New START If Trump cannot commit to maintaining nuclear limits for one year - a simple yes or no - it indicates either unwillingness or inability to conduct basic diplomacy.
Test 2: Valdai On December 28-29, 2025, 91 drones allegedly targeted Putin’s state residence near Valdai. The Russians retrieved targeting components and presented evidence to the US Defense Attache. No official US response has come.
If Trump cannot acknowledge what Russia characterizes as an assassination attempt using Western technology, Putin will conclude that Trump either doesn’t control his own government or is actively hostile.
The Saving Grace
McGovern’s assessment:
“The saving grace is a fellow named Vladimir Putin. He is a statesman of the kind I have never seen before in Russian or Soviet history. He is cautious. He is hellbent on building up his own country. And he’s not going to take the slightest risk of getting involved in a situation that will destroy the country that he has been so instrumental in building up.”
The Ukraine Connection
According to Russian accounts, on December 30, 2021, Biden spoke with Putin. Biden was reportedly “home alone” without his national security team. Putin asked for assurance that the US wouldn’t place strike missiles in Ukraine. Biden reportedly gave that assurance.
On January 21, 2022, Foreign Minister Lavrov met Secretary Blinken in Geneva. What about that assurance? “Forget about it,” Blinken said. “We weren’t with the president.”
On February 12, 2022, Biden and Putin spoke again. The US refused to discuss strike missiles in Ukraine or NATO membership.
Less than two weeks later: invasion.
The Problem of Indoctrination
McGovern’s deepest concern:
“Most Americans don’t know what’s going on. Mutual security - in layman’s terms, it’s the golden rule. Don’t do to others what you would not have them do to you.”
Americans are “indoctrinated to believe that Putin and the Russians are incarnate evil.” This makes sensible policy impossible.
Key Insights
Mutual Security is the Only Security: “There is no security without mutual security. That’s the whole name of the game here.”
Trust but Verify Worked: When Russia cheated on the ABM Treaty, detection and diplomacy resolved it. The framework held. Abandoning treaties removes the framework.
Putin’s Restraint is Real: Against McGovern’s expectations based on Russian/Soviet history, Putin is exercising extraordinary restraint.
Implications
Near-term (3 weeks)
February 5 arrives. Either the US commits to maintaining New START limits, or the last constraint on nuclear arsenals expires.
Medium-term (months)
Without treaty constraints, both sides face pressure to expand arsenals. Escalation becomes structural.
Long-term
The arms control architecture took decades to build. It was constructed by people who lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis. They are dying. Their knowledge is being lost.
Conclusion
Ray McGovern has watched 63 years of US-Russia relations. He helped build the arms control architecture. He watched it work.
Now he watches it collapse.
The question is whether anyone in power today understands what is being lost - and whether they care.
February 5 will tell us.
Ray McGovern represents a realist perspective critical of US foreign policy. His views on Putin’s character are interpretations informed by his experience but not universally shared. Alternative analytical frameworks exist.