Poland wants US nuclear weapons to deter Russia, will Trump grant request?
Poland’s president is asking the Trump administration to put some of the U.S. nuclear arsenal in his country. It’s a move Moscow sees as provocation but Poland’s leader said it’s necessary to protect the country.
President Andrzej Duda told the Financial Times that it’s “obvious” President Donald Trump could send American nuclear warheads currently in western Europe and the United States to Poland.
Duda’s request is in line with his attempts to convince Trump to restart a nuclear-sharing project rejected by the Biden administration in 2022.
Full Story
Poland’s president is asking the Trump administration to put some of the U.S. nuclear arsenal in his country.
President Andrzej Duda told the Financial Times that it is “obvious” President Donald Trump could send American nuclear warheads currently in western Europe or the United States to Poland. He said the action is needed because NATO’s borders have moved eastward since 1999.
“I think it’s not only that the time has come,” Duda said. “But that it would be safer if those weapons were already here.”
Duda’s request is in line with his attempts to convince Trump to restart a nuclear-sharing project rejected by the Biden administration in 2022.
Why does Poland want US nuclear weapons?
The Polish president said it is ultimately up to President Trump whether to deploy U.S. nuclear weapons. However, he pointed out that Russian President Vladimir Putin did move tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus, which is an ally of Moscow and shares a border with Poland.
Duda’s request for nuclear weapons comes as Poland and other NATO nations are fearful a potential ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine could embolden Moscow, making it a bigger threat to their borders.
A return to the Cold War? UK poised to house US nuclear weapons yet again
The U.S. may be preparing to return nuclear weapons to RAF Lakenheath in England, a U.S. Air Force base, according to a Federation of American Scientists report. Satellite images and procurement documents show significant infrastructure upgrades at the base, which previously stored U.S. nuclear weapons during the Cold War.
Upgrades include refurbishment of underground vaults, improvements to aircraft shelters and construction of a secure dormitory for nuclear personnel.
The move aligns with NATO’s nuclear modernization efforts, but there’s no confirmation on whether nuclear weapons will be permanently stored at the base.
Full Story
The United States may be taking steps to reintroduce nuclear weapons to British soil for the first time since 2008. A new report from the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) points to satellite imagery and military procurement documents suggesting extensive upgrades at RAF Lakenheath, a U.S. Air Force base in England. The report indicates that renovations began in 2021 and accelerated following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
According to the FAS report, underground vaults designed to store nuclear warheads have been refurbished, protective aircraft shelters have been upgraded and a secure dormitory for nuclear personnel is under construction.
Additionally, a Pentagon budget document identified Lakenheath as a location receiving updates for “special weapons” storage, a term often linked to nuclear armaments. An Air Force personnel document from 2023 also listed Lakenheath as a potential assignment location for nuclear weapons specialists.
Does this mean nuclear weapons have returned to the U.K.?
There are no confirmed reports that nuclear weapons have already been redeployed to RAF Lakenheath. The FAS report suggests that the upgrades may be designed to facilitate the rapid transfer of warheads from other NATO bases in the event of a crisis. The United States has an estimated 100 B61-12 gravity bombs stationed across NATO bases in Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Turkey.
While the presence of these upgrades indicates preparations for a potential nuclear role, there has been no official confirmation from the U.S. government, the U.K. or NATO regarding a finalized decision to store nuclear warheads at Lakenheath.
How is Russia responding to these developments?
Moscow previously warned that any return of U.S. nuclear weapons to the U.K. would be considered an escalation. The Kremlin has stated that such a move would be met with “compensating countermeasures.” Russia has already stationed tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus and continues modernizing its nuclear arsenal.
What is NATO’s role in nuclear modernization?
The reported upgrades at RAF Lakenheath align with NATO’s broader efforts to modernize nuclear infrastructure across Europe. Similar enhancements have been documented at storage sites in Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands.
RAF Lakenheath is home to U.S. Air Force F-35A Lightning II fighter jets, which are certified to carry nuclear weapons. The base remains a strategic location for NATO’s deterrence posture.
What happens next?
Neither NATO nor the U.S. government has formally addressed the latest upgrades at RAF Lakenheath. It remains unclear whether the site will soon house nuclear weapons or if the improvements are intended as a contingency plan.
China building military base 10x larger than the Pentagon: Report
China is building the world’s largest military command center that is at least 10 times bigger than the U.S. Pentagon. The Financial Times released a report about the base, citing information from U.S. officials, on Thursday, Jan. 30.
How did U.S. officials find out about the base?
Satellite images obtained by the news outlet show about a 1,500-acre site just southwest of Beijing. Intelligence officers believe this complex could be a so-called “doomsday” bunker for the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) to congregate in case of a nuclear war.
When finished, the command center, dubbed “Beijing Military City” makes the current world’s largest military command center, the Pentagon, look relatively small in comparison.
Intelligence experts also noted the images of the construction site, taken in mid-2024, are fitting for Beijing as the PLA prepares for its 100th anniversary in 2027.
What does it have to do with Taiwan?
It also comes as Chinese President Xi Jinping has repeatedly vowed to reunify with Taiwan in 2027, using force if necessary. The self-governing island has defense agreements in place with the United States, and the U.S. is dependent on Taiwan for most of the microchips which make electronics work.
What do we know about the facility so far?
A former CIA analyst told the Financial Times they suspect China’s new facility is meant to enhance Beijing’s “nuclear war-fighting capability.”
Around 100 cranes were observed operating at the three-mile site, constructing underground facilities connected by tunnels.
The Financial Times reported that there is no military presence currently at the site, but it has “all the hallmarks of a sensitive military site.” Popular hiking trails near the installation are closed and access to the grounds is strictly prohibited.
There are also signs warning against flying drones or taking pictures and the back of the project is blocked off by a checkpoint.
What did we know about China’s military expansion plans?
As Straight Arrow News previously reported, Beijing is beefing up its nuclear arsenal and the Pentagon estimates China will have 1,500 nuclear weapons by 2035.
Beijing also appears to be building a massive nuclear fusion center in the southwest city of Mianyang, which could allow for new nuclear weapons designs and the housing of nuclear weapons.
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists moved the minute hand on their Doomsday Clock to 89 seconds to midnight Tuesday.
“The world has not made sufficient progress on existential risks, threatening all of humanity,” said chair Daniel Holz.
The clock sat at 90 seconds to midnight for the past two years. This is the closest it’s ever been to midnight since the advocacy group started using the clock in 1947.
What did scientists say about global risks?
The decision was based on countries with nuclear weapons “investing hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons that can destroy civilization many times over.”
The group also cited progress in developing “disruptive technologies,” such as artificial intelligence.
New images reveal China working on massive nuclear fusion center: Report
Beijing appears to be building up its nuclear arsenal after a revelation that China is constructing a massive new nuclear fusion research center in the southwest city of Mianyang. Intelligence officials said the facility will be used to ramp up production of nuclear weapons and unleash new clean energy.
The findings come from a report by Reuters on Tuesday, Jan. 28. Satellite images shared with the news outlet revealed the construction of the sprawling facility.
What are analysts saying?
A U.S. research analyst told Reuters that the pictures show four outlying “arms,” where hydrogen isotopes will be fused with an ultra-powerful laser to produce nuclear energy.
Researchers said the facility’s layout is similar to the multibillion-dollar U.S. National Ignition Facility in California. In 2022, that facility created more energy from a fusion reaction than was pumped into the target from powerful lasers. The phenomenon is known as “scientific breakeven.”
The new Chinese facility sports an experiment bay that is about 50% bigger than the one at NIF, which is currently the world’s largest, according to analysts who viewed the satellite photos.
Analysts said they are confident any world power with “a NIF-type facility” will likely be using it to improve current weapon designs and break ground on “future bomb designs without testing.”
What is China saying about the facility?
Neither China’s Foreign Ministry nor the country’s science and technology ministry have responded to questions regarding the nuclear facility.
Previous findings
A U.S. intelligence envoy released satellite images of the site in November 2020. The images show a cleared out plot of land where the new Chinese facility, known as the Laser Fusion Major Device Laboratory, will be. Intelligence officials noted in their report the area will likely house Chinese nuclear weapons support centers.
UN watchdog chief warns world Iran’s ‘pressing gas pedal’ on nuclear program
The United Nations nuclear watchdog chief is warning world leaders that Iran’s recent promise to ramp up enrichment of uranium to nuclear weapons grade levels is well underway. Rafael Grossi, the International Atomic Energy Agency Director General, said, “Iran has moved into increasing the production, enrichment of 60% sevenfold.”
Grossi added, “So, I think this is a clear indication of an acceleration. They are pressing the gas pedal.”
Grossi told reporters at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Tuesday, Jan. 21, Iran told the U.N. nuclear watchdog in December 2024 that it would rapidly increase uranium enrichment to around 90% purity.
The IAEA said about 42kg of uranium enriched to that level is enough to create one nuclear bomb.
Grossi said Iran currently has about 200 kg of uranium enriched up to 60%.
The warning from Grossi comes after French President Emmanuel Macron cautioned Western and European allies that Tehran is reaching a “point of no return” in its pursuit of nuclear-weapon-grade uranium earlier in January 2025.
Grossi called on Tehran and the Trump administration to begin talks to deter Iran from going further with its nuclear program.
It remains to be seen if President Donald Trump, who took a hardline with Iran during his first term, or Tehran will be open to a discussion.
Iran has repeatedly denied it is enriching uranium to make a nuclear weapon and claims that it is being used for peaceful purposes.
Why Macron fears Iran’s nuclear program is nearing ‘point of no return’
French President Emmanuel Macron warned the world on Monday, Jan. 6, that Iran is nearing “the point of no return” when it comes to procuring potential nuclear weapons. Macron said during his address to French ambassadors that Tehran has enough enriched uranium to power a handful of nuclear warheads, and called Iran the biggest strategic threat that Europe faces.
It’s not just Macron who said Iran is increasing its enriched uranium stockpile. The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog said in December that Iran was “dramatically” accelerating enrichment, and roughly 90% of its uranium stockpile was at bomb-grade level.
France was part of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, which fell apart in 2018 when the first Trump administration withdrew the United States. Under that deal, Iran had agreed to pull back on its nuclear program in exchange for international sanctions being lifted.
As a result of the U.S. backing out, Iran began enriching uranium at higher levels, which reportedly shortened the time needed to make a nuclear device from months to weeks.
President-elect Donald Trump’s return to the White House on Monday, Jan. 20, is also reportedly raising fresh concerns after he drew a hardline with Tehran during his first term.
Macron said he is still debating whether more sanctions may be the answer to deterring Tehran from further enhancing its nuclear program and will talk with the incoming Trump administration about the “Iranian question.”
Iran’s nuclear program has reached a critical point, with intelligence reports indicating uranium enrichment is nearing weapons-grade levels. Analysts suggest Tehran has accumulated sufficient enriched material for multiple nuclear bombs, should its leadership decide to proceed.
While Iranian officials deny any intention of developing nuclear weapons, U.S. and Israeli authorities are preparing to address the potential threat.
Proposed measures include tightening economic sanctions to further destabilize Tehran’s economy, and providing advanced military support to Israel, such as bunker-busting munitions capable of targeting deeply buried nuclear sites.
Israeli officials, bolstered by recent air superiority gained in Syria and Iran following October airstrikes, view the current situation as a pivotal moment.
Reports suggest the Israeli air force is readying for potential preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, should such actions become necessary.
Recent Israeli airstrikes across Syria have already undermined Iran’s regional influence, targeting weapons stockpiles and air defense systems weakened by the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime. These operations are part of a broader strategy to curtail Iran’s military reach and deny advanced weaponry to its proxies.
Despite escalating tensions, diplomatic solutions remain an option.
Iran has signaled a willingness to negotiate but insists on terms that exclude external pressure. Iranian officials have warned that any attack on its nuclear facilities could lead to a withdrawal from international agreements, further heightening the stakes.
Both U.S. and Israeli officials emphasize the urgency of staying ahead in what they describe as a high-stakes race. While neither nation seeks a larger conflict, their shared focus remains on deterring Iran and preventing nuclear weapons from entering the equation.
Belarus, Russia strengthen relations with security treaty, possible nuclear weapons
Russia’s relationship with Belarus has become even stronger as the two countries sign a security treaty. The pact solidified Russia’s closest ally, rolling out new facilities to house powerful weapons for Moscow.
The European country borders Russia, and is key for the Kremlin as war continues just past Belarus’ border in Ukraine.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has given Belarus access to its nuclear power, including its newest hypersonic ballistic missile. The country’s doctrine says that if Russia or one of its allies’ sovereignty is threatened, they can use nuclear weapons for protection. The timing comes as tensions mount due to continued support by Western countries for Ukraine.
Following the agreement, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said, “I have warned all my enemies, ‘friends’ and adversaries: If you step on the border, the answer will be momentary.”
Lukashenko has ruled Belarus for 30 years with the help of Russia, including during major protests against his rule in 2020 and 2021.
On Tuesday, Dec. 10, Lukashenko made a public request to Putin. He asked the leader to deploy more weapons to Belarus to “calm some heads.” He asked specifically for the Oreshnik missile, a high-powered missile that Russia has used against Ukraine. According to Putin, the Oreshnik can move at 10 times the speed of sound and hit a target without detection by defense systems.
In response, Putin said these missiles could reach Belarus during the second half of 2025. He said Belarus could choose the targets but would not take command over nuclear power.
Putin maintains that Moscow will retain control of these weapons after they are deployed to Russia’s ally. On the other hand, Belarus’ security council said it’s up to the president to approve them.
Dissenting, exiled Belarusian opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya took to X to criticize the pact. Tsikhanouskaya said it strengthens Russia’s control. About Putin, she said, “The deployment of new weapons and using Belarus as a pawn in his imperial ambitions threatens us all.”
In 2022, Lukashenko allowed Russia to use his country as a corridor to send troops into Ukraine. He also said Belarus already holds dozens of tactical weapons that went undetected by the West.
This is why it would be ‘ludicrous’ for Russia to use nuclear weapons
Stop me if you’ve heard this before. The President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, is threatening to use nuclear weapons if Ukraine gets or uses certain other weapons in certain ways.
In the latest example of nuclear saber-rattling, Moscow changed its protocols for using nuclear weapons. If a non-nuclear country like Ukraine, is allied with a nuclear-armed country like the United States, and puts Russian sovereignty at risk, the Kremlin said it will use nukes.
Over the course of the war in Ukraine, Russia has issued dozens of threats concerning the use of its nuclear weapons, and each time the threat rang hollow. Straight Arrow News Reporter Ryan Robertson spoke with Matt Shoemaker, a former U.S. intelligence officer who spent time on the Russia desk, about whether to take Russia’s threats seriously.
The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity. You can watch the full interview in the video above.
Ryan Robertson: The last couple of days, the announcement came out that Russia was amending its protocols for nuclear responses to say that if Ukraine, or a nation, attacks Russia with long-range weapons that puts Russian sovereignty at risk, and that nation is being backed by a nuclear power, then Russia can use nuclear weapons.
The announcement was made in September, and went live at the same time Ukraine was using long-range ATACMS outside of Kursk. Is this all just more bluster from Putin?
Matthew Shoemaker: Short answer, yes. There’s been a lot of sensationalism, especially here in the United States, with regards to this usage of ATACMS. If you go on the Drudge Report, for example, the past three days, their main headlines have been essentially, “Nuclear war is about to start. All of these countries are updating their nuclear weapons programs and their nuclear responses.”
This was foreseen, Russia, let’s put it that way, had a good idea that this was going to happen, which is why they announced it back in September. They waited [to implement it] until President Biden announced [his plans]. And let’s be honest, President Putin knows President Biden. They’ve met multiple times. Biden’s got two months left on the clock. Putin knows that. Putin knows that, you know, Trump’s about to come in. Putin is going to have a much better time, from his perspective, negotiating with Trump.
You know, this is all just bluster at this point. No one anticipates, no one expects that President Putin is going to start nuclear war over this with President Biden and two months left. There’s nothing whatsoever in it for President Putin to do this. So this is all just bluster, unfortunately. And, you know, people with their own political axes to grind are using it for their advantage, whether it be bludgeoning the other side over the head with their political comments or just to try and stir up support for themselves. So, you know, there’s a lot of sensationalism going on.
Ryan Robertson: Sure, sure. I mean, it’s 2024, right? You can’t get by without some sensationalism, right? You mentioned something about the ATACMS. You know, President Biden has approved ATACMS. Ukraine probably doesn’t have that many long-range ATACMS at this point, but President Biden has a few billion dollars left of congressionally approved money to spend. If Ukraine suddenly got an influx of ATACMS, you know, long-range missiles, would that be enough to change the course of the war over the next couple of months before President Trump takes office?
Matthew Shoemaker: A short answer, in my professional assessment as a former intelligence officer, is no. None of that is in President Biden’s wheelhouse. Over the past three years of this conflict, effectively, he has slow-walked, at every single opportunity, any chance that the Ukrainians had to get an upper hand with regards to the Russians. President Biden has denied them that. The only thing President Biden has actually done is given the Ukrainians enough to stay in the fight.
And that’s essentially what this is more than anything, because—and not to get too far into the weeds and become too much of a tactician with regards to this—as you mentioned, the Ukrainians don’t have enough of these ATACMS. The ATACMS themselves come in multiple variants. No one really knows which variants the Ukrainians have or how many of those variants they have. The two main variants are–one is a main large warhead itself. And that’s used against, usually, clusters of personnel, for example. That tends to have a shorter range because it’s heavier. You need a bigger warhead for it.
The other variant has a lot of smaller munitions in it and kind of just sprays them out over a wide area. That one, from my understanding, has a little bit of a longer range. We don’t know how many the Ukrainians have. We don’t know how many of the variants they have either. That sort of thing.
On top of it, the Americans have been helping the Ukrainians pay for the development of a Ukrainian-made, essentially ATACMS-style weapon that the Ukrainians have been fielding, and they can produce those themselves. So, you know, the Ukrainians have been lobbing these into Russia, and this doesn’t really change any of the tactics on the field. It is all just bluster. It creates a headline. Because in reality, yes, for the Americans to say you can use these weapons against Russian soil is a new development, if you will.
I would say that, unlike most of the reporting, from my understanding, there actually are quite a lot of restrictions still on the use of ATACMS.
Ryan Robertson: Right. The Ukrainians can only use them around Kursk.
Matthew Shoemaker: Exactly. It’s meant to give the Ukrainians some bargaining chip when Trump does come into office, that the Ukrainians own, essentially, Russian territory that they can negotiate to give back to the Russians under a Trump administration. There’s a lot of gamesmanship, a lot of different tactics going on, a lot of chess being played. But for people to just fly off the handle and assume that nuclear war is coming is irresponsible at best and just ludicrous at worst.
Ryan Robertson: Matt Shoemaker, always a pleasure talking to you.