I remember watching one of the Soviet Sputnik satellites flying over the back yard of our Iowa home. Besides launching a “space race” between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Sputnik heightened tensions between the two countries over potential use of nuclear weapons. Back in the 1960s, we graders practiced school drills for a nuclear attack. This period of competition became known as the Cold War. To this day, the U.S. and Russia own most of the nuclear weapons that exist. The NASA website makes a point:

The Sputnik launch changed everything. As a technical achievement, Sputnik caught the world’s attention and the American public off-guard. Its size was more impressive than (the U.S.) Vanguard’s intended 3.5-pound payload. In addition, the public feared that the Soviets’ ability to launch satellites also translated into the capability to launch ballistic missiles that could carry nuclear weapons from Europe to the U.S. Then the Soviets struck again; on November 3, Sputnik II was launched, carrying a much heavier payload, including a dog named Laika. (NASA website).

Our life of living with nuclear weapons changed dramatically since Sputnik. The public is vulnerable to being caught off guard again because few are paying any attention to nuclear weapons proliferation. Last year, Annie Jacobsen published Nuclear War: A Scenario, which provided an update on where the country stands regarding our nuclear weapons complex. Jacobsen’s work is part of the picture.

Our compliance with the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, which commits all parties to negotiate in good faith on effective measures relating to the cessation of the nuclear arms race, nuclear disarmament, and general and complete disarmament, is at a stand still. The story of how that happened is less interesting than the diversion from this core compliance issue caused by attention to North Korea and Iran’s development of nuclear technologies. It avoids the basic question of when will the U.S. and Russia comply with Article Six of the treaty?

Daryl G. Kimball, Executive Director of the Arms Control Association, addressed the recent bombing of Iran by Israel and the U.S. He argues, “U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to join Israel’s illegal military attacks against Iranian scientists and safeguarded nuclear sites represents an irresponsible departure from his earlier pursuit of diplomacy. It will increase the risk of a nuclear-armed Iran and erode confidence in the nuclear nonproliferation system.”

The nuclear deal that Trump unilaterally abandoned in 2018, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), imposed limits, prohibitions and intrusive inspection requirements on Iran that were to last for 10 or 15 years, with some being permanent, Kimball wrote. He expressed hope that the negotiating framework can still be salvaged, even if it has been severely damaged by this year’s U.S. military operations in Iran.

In the meanwhile, the U.S. government continues to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on our nuclear complex. We don’t hear much about that, except when it’s federal budget time. Ann Suellentrop, vice chair of the PeaceWorks Kansas City board and a member of the Physicians for Social Responsibility Board, noted in the Kansas City Star, “Kansas City’s nuclear bomb parts plant is ramping up significantly.” She provided details:

There is a new federal government plan to increase production of plutonium pits — the trigger that starts the bomb explosion in nuclear weapons — to 80 pits per year in each of the next 50 years. This is in comparison with the current production of fewer than 30 per year. The sites that are supposed to work together on what amounts to a new nuclear arms race include Kansas City’s federal nuclear bomb parts plant, managed by Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies. That is the Kansas City National Security Campus located in the south part of the city. The recent allocation of taxpayer funds for this National Nuclear Security Administration site reveals a huge jump from the 2025 budget from $1.3 billion to $1.7 billion in 2026. The plant is now doubling in size as it produces electrical and mechanical parts for seven new nuclear weapons programs simultaneously. (Kansas City Star, July 9, 2025).

Despite the efforts of Suellentrop and others, the nuclear weapons spending issue gains little media traction. “We need a mass movement of people to speak up and hold the government accountable,” Suellentrop said. The fact is we need a mass movement to speak up and hold the government accountable in many areas. If such a thing exists, it hasn’t ramped up fast enough.

The irony with the war between Israel and Iran is we appear to be returning to the days of Sputnik. Joe Cirincione recently opined, “we look at the unintended consequences of this 12-day war: the risk of dragging us back to the nuclear anarchy of the 1950’s, when many nations — friends and foes — sought nuclear weapons.” The 1950s may be a fond memory for some of us. We definitely don’t want to go back, especially as it pertains to proliferation of nuclear weapons.