Trump is betting the farm on intuition — and the nuclear clock is ticking

The global security landscape has shifted from a state of managed tension to one of unmapped volatility. We find ourselves at the intersection of two seismic events: the final collapse of the traditional arms control architecture and the emergence of a high-stakes “Board of Peace” diplomacy that treats global stability as a negotiable asset rather than a permanent fixture. The most chilling development of the month occurred at midnight on Feb. 5. For the first time in 50 years, the U.S. and Russia are operating without a single legally binding limit on their nuclear arsenals. The expiration of the New START treaty, representing the final vestige of a half-century of strategic guardrails, has effectively blinded the international community. The administration’s decision to let the treaty lapse, despite Moscow’s last-minute offer for a one-year voluntary ceiling, signals a radical bet. Washington is banking on the idea that a vacuum of accountability provides the “maximum pressure” necessary to coerce rivals into a new, more aggressive pact. However, nuclear deterrence is not a corporate takeover; it is a system of mathematical predictability. By removing the “eyes” of the treaty — specifically the short-notice inspections and data exchanges that verified the status of 1,550 warheads and 700 delivery systems — we have replaced verification with paranoia. Against this backdrop of nuclear uncertainty, the scene in Oman has been surreal, but the real gravity shifted to Washington. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, while departing Muscat, described the talks as “over for now” but a “good start.” However, the world is processing the immediate fallout of a high-stakes White House meeting between President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu. Netanyahu, who moved his visit up by a week out of “anxiety” over the Muscat talks, has reportedly pressed for a “no-brainer” expansion of any deal to include not just uranium enrichment, but a total dismantling of Iran’s ballistic missile program. The presence of U.S. Navy Adm. Brad Cooper in full dress uniform alongside Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner underscores a departure from traditional diplomacy. While President Trump characterized the discussions as “very good” and claimed Iran “wants to make a deal very badly,” the reality is increasingly militarized. Trump is deploying of a second aircraft carrier strike group to the region, effectively turning the “Board of Peace” into a theater of “Board of War” if negotiations falter. Just as the delegations were packing their bags, the president signed an executive order that weaponizes the global supply chain. Effective Feb. 7, the U.S. established a mechanism to impose 25 percent tariffs on any country that continues to trade with Iran. This move aims to starve the Iranian regime of its remaining lifelines, specifically targeting the $14 billion in trade with China and the $10.5 billion with Iraq. However, the ripple effects are likely to be counterproductive. Beijing, already frustrated by the expiration of New START and the U.S. mineral stockpile initiative, is unlikely to view a 25 percent tariff as an invitation to a trilateral nuclear framework. Simultaneously, regional stability is at risk as partners like Turkey and the UAE face an impossible choice between Washington’s markets and their own regional economic realities. The danger of this “negotiating from the brink” strategy was made manifest on Feb. 3. The intercept of an Iranian Shahed-139 drone by an F-35C near the USS Abraham Lincoln was a warning shot for a world without guardrails. The administration’s “Project Vault,” launched days ago at the Critical Minerals Ministerial, highlights the desire to secure supply chains with a $12 billion stockpile for a new era of competition. Yet, a renewed nuclear arms race is a diversion of resources and a risk to human life that no amount of mineral wealth can offset. We are trading the predictable cost of arms control for the unpredictable and exponential cost of an unrestrained buildup. True leadership in the nuclear age has historically been defined by the quiet, technical work of maintaining the systems that keep the world’s most dangerous weapons under lock and key. Today, we have traded that key for the intuition of the “deal.” The world holds its breath. If the next round of talks fails to accommodate Netanyahu’s new “red lines” without collapsing the progress made in Muscat, the U.S. will find itself in the most precarious position of the century: no deal in the Middle East, no treaty with Russia, and a global trade war triggered by 25 percent tariffs. We have surrendered information for the hope of a “perfect” deal. We can only hope the wind doesn’t start to blow before we find another way to lock the door. Imran Khalid is a physician and has a master’s degree in international relations.