Today’s nuclear landscape is increasingly fraught with veiled threats and uncertainty. The United States asserts that it has not conducted any full-scale nuclear detonations since its self-imposed moratorium in 1992. Subcritical tests continue under the Stockpile Stewardship Program. These experiments use nuclear materials but do not result in a full detonation. They comply with the moratorium but show a continued reliance on nuclear testing to maintain the arsenal.
This official narrative leaves lingering questions. With thousands of nuclear tests conducted globally before 1992 and the U.S. as the only nation acknowledged to have used nuclear weapons in wartime, could it be possible that nuclear warfare has quietly continued – but in ways and places far removed from public scrutiny? If so, where might this hidden warfare take place, and what evidence, if any, supports such a possibility?
A Business Insider video chronicles nuclear tests from 1945 to 2016 and visualizes the massive scale of detonations during this time. While not all were full explosions, many – especially after 1992 – are presumed to be subcritical detonations. These tests took place on land, in the ocean, and underground. Historical patterns like these may hint at continued nuclear activities in places designed to avoid detection, such as deep underwater environments. This idea gains weight when considering unexplained maritime tensions and advancements in underwater nuclear delivery systems, like Russia’s Poseidon UUV.
The Oceans Are A Stage for Nuclear Conflict
The deep ocean provides the ideal environment for covert operations. Its vastness, remoteness, and inaccessibility make it a perfect stage for activities that governments might prefer to keep hidden. If nuclear war were to continue in any form, as a low-intensity conflict or an extension of testing, the ocean would likely be its battleground.
Historically, nuclear tests in the Pacific and other regions demonstrated the feasibility of underwater detonations. These explosions generated shockwaves capable of disrupting ecosystems and even reshaping islands. Today, with the advent of advanced autonomous underwater vehicles (UUVs), like Russia’s “radioactive tsunami” Poseidon system, the potential for concealed nuclear activity beneath the waves is even greater. These systems are designed not only for testing but also as strategic weapons. They create massive underwater explosions meant to flood coastal cities with radioactive waves.
Could these advancements point to ongoing, unacknowledged use of nuclear weapons? The persistence of maritime disputes and unexplained incidents at sea – such as reports of unusual seismic activity in remote areas – raises the possibility that nuclear detonations may be occurring far from public view.
A Congressional Check on Presidential Authority
While the nature of nuclear testing and warfare raises critical questions, another issue with equally high stakes lies in the authority to launch nuclear weapons. For decades, the President of the United States has held sole authority to order a nuclear strike. This power does not require consultation with Congress, military advisors, or the Department of Defense, making it one of the most consequential unilateral powers vested in a single individual.
Recognizing the dangers of this arrangement, members of Congress have sought to introduce greater oversight into the decision-making process. A resolution spearheaded by Senator Edward Markey and Representative Ted Lieu, known as the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act, aims to require Congressional approval for any first-use nuclear strike. This legislation represents an effort to impose checks and balances on a system designed for Cold War-era rapid response, ensuring that monumental decisions are not made in isolation.
The debate over presidential nuclear authority came to the forefront during the Trump administration, when concerns over the President’s impulsive rhetoric – such as his threat of “fire and fury” against North Korea – sparked fears about the lack of institutional safeguards. Similar concerns persist today, as Congress works to strike a balance between maintaining deterrence and preventing unilateral actions that could lead to catastrophic consequences.
The Madness of Power: Nixon, Trump, and Calling Their Bluffs
The risks of concentrating nuclear authority in one individual are not new. Richard Nixon’s “madman theory” epitomizes the dangerous potential of this arrangement. Nixon sought to make adversaries believe he was unpredictable and willing to use nuclear weapons at any moment, leveraging this perceived volatility as a strategic advantage. His goal was to keep enemies off balance, forcing them to tread carefully.
Donald Trump’s approach during his presidency mirrored aspects of Nixon’s strategy. His threats, such as the infamous “fire and fury” comment, projected an image of unpredictability that echoed the madman theory. However, Trump’s rhetoric often blurred the line between calculated deterrence and reckless improvisation, raising questions about whether his actions were part of a deliberate strategy or simply impulsive.
These historical examples underscore the need for a more robust system of checks and balances. The proposed Congressional resolution to limit presidential authority over nuclear strikes reflects a growing recognition that the risks of unilateral decision-making are too great to ignore in an era of heightened global tension.
Living In A World Without Memory
Another factor complicating today’s nuclear landscape is the passage of time since the last acknowledged wartime use of these weapons. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 are etched in history. Few people alive today witnessed their aftermath firsthand.
Military and political leaders have no direct experience with nuclear war. They rely on simulations and history books to understand it. Donald Trump was a toddler when the last acknowledged nuclear bomb was used in wartime. Joe Biden was only three years old. This generational gap makes nuclear war feel distant and abstract. Meanwhile, modern weapons introduce new and pressing risks.
Lies Beneath the Surface
The U.S. officially upholds a moratorium on nuclear testing. However, there is little transparency around subcritical detonations and advanced military technologies. Seismic anomalies in remote oceans hint at hidden activity. New underwater delivery systems add to the mystery. Unexplained maritime tensions suggest a nuclear landscape beyond what is acknowledged.
Has nuclear warfare quietly taken on a hidden form? If these weapons are used underwater or in unmonitored areas, the public might never know. Military secrecy could keep the truth out of sight. This possibility highlights the urgent need for accountability and transparency in global nuclear policy.
A Call for Vigilance and Accountability
The modern nuclear landscape is full of uncertainty. Moreover, subcritical tests, covert underwater technologies, and unchecked presidential power raise the stakes. However, proposals to limit presidential authority over nuclear strikes represent a step forward.They also reveal the fragility of current systems.
Advancements in technology increasingly blur the lines between testing and warfare. As a result, the need for vigilance has never been greater. Furthermore, what we don’t know about today’s nuclear landscape is as critical as what we do. Therefore, remaining in the dark could have catastrophic consequences.
