A Commission report was completed in February 2012 on moving to global zero for U.S. nuclear weapons. It was chaired by former Senator Chuck Hagel from Nebraska who became Secretary of Defense in 2013. This was two years after the 2010 New START treaty reduced U.S. warheads deployed for strategic forces to 1550, although special treaty rules allowed a warhead count closer to 2000. A review of that report from January 2013 prepared by the RSC of the Senate notes: “The Global Zero organization was created in 2008, and proposed a 75% reduction in U.S. nuclear weapons,” [or roughly leaving the U.S. at the 500, warhead level]. Perhaps it is not coincidental, but an October 2025 bill by Senators Warren, Sanders and Markey proposed the U.S. unilaterally act to keep only 150 Minuteman missiles (150 warheads) and as few as 4 submarines with an estimated 300 warheads, (4 subs each with 16 missiles, each carrying 5-6 warheads), implying a total strategic nuclear force of roughly 500 warheads as well. Perhaps reflecting this idea, one current candidate for Senate called for all $200 billion in nuclear weapons spending to be cut annually from the defense budget, although total strategic nuclear DoW and NNSA related spending is roughly $60 billion.

The 2013 Senate report continued: “According to its web site, the Global Zero movement advocates the elimination of nuclear weapons. In furtherance of that goal, Senator Hagel and others issued a report last year for this organization proposing a U.S. nuclear force posture and policy for the 21st century. This past Monday, co-authors of that report issued a press release purporting to set “the record straight on Chuck Hagel’s global zero position on nuclear weapons.” Of critical importance, the Commission report characterized itself as “not unilateralist.” The RSC explains further the Commission post-report press release goes on to say the authors only support bilateral, negotiated, verifiable U.S.-Russian arms reductions, to be followed by multilateral negotiations, as it recommends a 75 percent reduction in the number of deployed nuclear warheads. But page 1 of the Global Zero report itself reads as follows: “These steps could be taken with Russia in unison through reciprocal presidential directives, negotiated in another round of bilateral arms reduction talks, or implemented unilaterally.” The report also reads: ‘The reductions and de-alerting proposed under this illustrative plan could be carried out in unison by the United States and Russia through reciprocal presidential directives, negotiated in another round of bilateral arms reduction talks, or implemented unilaterally.”

Kyle Balzer, In the Eye of the Beholder: Deterrence Gaps, Real or Imagined?, No. 672, October 29, 2026

download

On October 17, President Trump told a Kentucky rally that the war with Iran is “going to end very quickly.” A day later, he declared that Iran had been “systematically destroyed, both Militarily and Financially,” and warned that unless Tehran changes course, “we will soon finish the job.” Only ten days earlier, he had promised not to strike Iran before the midterms. Tehran’s foreign minister answered with a taunt: “Want to try your luck again?”

The bluntest demand for an end to this war has come not from the White House but from New Jersey. Asked at an October 8 Senate debate what advice he would give Trump on Iran, Republican challenger and Navy veteran Justin Murphy began with two words: “Finish it.” The clip quickly went viral, drawing national coverage far beyond the state.