The Global Nuclear Arms Race: Spending, Capabilities, and Future Risks

Nearly eight decades since Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the world’s nuclear powers aren't slowing down. They keep spending more, modernizing faster, and experts are watching them move weapons out of storage and into potential use. It’s a real arms race happening right now.

The nine states that hold nuclear weapons the US, Russia, China, Britain, France, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea put together spent nearly $119 billion on these weapons in 2025. That number comes from the latest report by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, or ICAN.

That figure is a record. It’s a nineteen percent jump from just 2024. In raw terms, spending climbed by almost $16.8 billion in that single year alone. It just keeps accelerating.

“A new nuclear arms race is upon us,” the ICAN report warned. That's the headline.

But there’s more than just the money moving around. A separate look from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, SIPRI, also raised serious concerns about where these global arsenals are headed. Sure, the sheer number of actual warheads has dropped over the decades. But SIPRI noted that the amount of weapons ready for potential use is actually increasing.

“Even though we have fewer nuclear weapons,” SIPRI director Karim Haggag told AFP, “the level of nuclear dangers and risks are rising.” It’s a shift in focus, isn't it? From quantity to capability .

---

National Spending and Arsenal Estimates

Let’s look at some specific players. India ranks sixth among the nine states when you look at spending in 2025.

India spent an estimated $2.8 billion on nuclear programs that year. That’s roughly Rs 246.7 billion. A twelve percent bump from the prior year. It accounts for about three percent of their entire defense budget, according to ICAN. In real-time terms, they were spending around Rs 469,396 every minute just on nuclear activities in 2025.

SIPRI estimates India holds about 190 nuclear weapons. These are spread across land missiles, aircraft, and sea systems.

Then there’s China. They stayed second largest in spending after the United States. Beijing spent an estimated $13.5 billion on their forces in 2025. That’s almost five times what India spent. Their arsenal is pegged around 620 weapons compared to India's 190.

Why does China worry? Because they aren't just spending; they are expanding faster than anyone else. SIPRI suggests Beijing is pushing towards a bigger, more diversified force land missiles, strategic bombers, submarine systems. It’s all linked up now.

China doesn't release the full numbers publicly, so ICAN had to estimate their expenditure by looking at four percent of their total military budget. That kind of opacity just feeds the uncertainty.

Pakistan spent $1.5 billion on nuclear weapons in 2025. That’s lower than India’s spending. Their arsenal is estimated around 170 weapons, still focused mainly on land-based missiles and aircraft deployments right now. Islamabad keeps pushing for sea-based capabilities, though. Their program involves state facilities like Khan Research Laboratories.

The numbers really show the disparity here. India spends nearly twice as much as Pakistan on nuclear gear. China’s spending in 2025 was almost nine times that of Pakistan. That gap is huge when you look at it.

---

The Hierarchy of Nuclear Spending (2025)

And then there's the big one, the United States. They remain the biggest spender by a mile. In 2025, Washington allocated $69.2 billion to its nuclear forces. It’s more than all the other nuclear-armed states combined.

The hierarchy is clear: China at $13.5 billion , Britain at $12.6 billion , Russia at $9.5 billion , and France following in at $7.7 billion . Then India at $2.8 billion , Pakistan at $1.5 billion , Israel at $1.2 billion , and North Korea with a staggering estimate of $656 million .

When you look at the total over these five years from 2021 to 2025 the nine nations spent around $471 billion on their arsenals combined. That’s just the spending, not including everything else that’s happening behind the scenes.

---

Long-Term Commitments and Technological Fear

The worry isn't just about how much they spend now. It’s what those expenditures lock them into for decades. This is a crucial point from the ICAN report. The money spent today isn't just budgeted; many of these systems are designed to last for generations.

Think about it: China’s JL-3 submarine missile system, for instance, they expect it to be active well into the 2050s. Pakistan’s Shaheen-I program is similarly projected to run long term. India's Rafale deterrent could stay operational until maybe 2072, based on how these platforms usually hold up.

The US has even longer horizons. Their Sentinel missile program might keep running past 2100. And they’ve built facilities for plutonium production designed to last until around 2120.

ICAN argues that this means future governments are locked into massive spending obligations, long after the current political leaders have gone. It creates these deep strategic commitments you can't easily unwind.

And then there’s the fear about technology. Susi Snyder, who led ICAN’s program and co-authored the report, was blunt. She said the scale-up in nuclear programs, combined with worries that artificial intelligence could dangerously increase the risk of a nuclear use, was deeply alarming.

She told AFP, “To be perfectly honest, I’m terrified.”

It’s not just about missiles and dollars anymore. It's about how this whole system is evolving, faster than anyone can keep up with. The danger isn't just in the numbers; it's in the movement toward operational readiness .