Anuclear triad is a three-pronged military force structure of global-range land-basedintercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs),submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), andstrategic bombers withnuclear bombs and missiles.^[1] More broadly, it can sometimes be used to mean any nuclear force with land, sea, and air basing, and more limited range.^[2] Countries build nuclear triads to eliminate an enemy's ability to destroy a nation's nuclear forces in afirst-strike attack, which preserves their own ability to launch asecond strike and therefore increases theirnuclear deterrence.^[3][4][5]

Four countries are known to have a nuclear triad:the United States,Russia,India, andChina.^[6][7][8] While the US and the USSR (the predecessor state to Russia) acquired triads as part of theCold War'snuclear arms race, operationalizing SLBMs during the 1960s,^[9][10] India achieved a viable triad in 2018^[11] and China in 2020.^[12]

France had a nuclear triad, but in 1996 France abandoned its strategic bombers, IRBM underground silo-basedS3 missiles, andHadès SRBMs.^[13] Despite becoming the third nuclear power in 1952, theUnited Kingdomnever operated a triad.

Pakistan and likely Israel all possess weapons in a triad structure, but none has true strategic range in all three 'legs.'^[14][15]

The components of the nuclear triad

Bomber aircraft

Intercontinental ballistic missile

Ballistic missile submarine

While traditionalnuclear strategy holds that a nuclear triad provides the best level of deterrence from attack, most nuclear powers do not have the military budget to sustain a full triad. The only two countries that have successfully maintained a strong nuclear triad for most of the nuclear age are the United States and Russia.^[5][16][1] Triads include:

1. Bomber aircraft: Aircraft carrying nuclear weapons including gravity bombs, or air-launched ballistic or cruise missiles (ALBMs orALCMs), for use against ground or sea targets.^[3][17]
2. Land-basedmissiles of various ranges (MRBMs,IRBMs orICBMs): Delivery vehicles powered by a liquid or solid-fueled rocket that primarily travel in a ballistic (free-fall) trajectory.^[3][5][17]
3. Ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs): Nuclear missiles launched from ships or submarines (SLBMs). They are classified under an umbrella of vessels and submarines that are capable of launching a ballistic missile.^[17][3][5]

The triad enables a nation to deliver a nuclear attack by air from land or sea. The United States built its triad to maximize the probability that it could retaliate for a first strike. Having three legs also protects against new technology, like an enemymissile-defense system.^[18] It also gives thecommander-in-chief the flexibility to use different types of weapons for the appropriate strike while also maintaining a reserve of nuclear weapons safe from a counter-force strike.

• Strategic bombers are the first leg of the triad. They have greater flexibility in their deployment and weaponry, and can be quickly deployed and recalled in response to last-minute decisions.^[19] Since bombers are recallable, sending them away from a potential target is a highly visible way of demonstrating to enemies and allies that a nation wants to resolve a fight, thus preventing war. Some disadvantages include confusion on the type ofpayload. Bombers can hold both nuclear and conventional weapons. During an event, an enemy could suspect that a conventionally-armed bomber was actually carrying a nuclear weapon, encouraging the enemy to attack the bomber or make a nuclear strike. Furthermore, bombers that are scrambled might intensify tension and arouse suspicion of an upcoming nuclear strike.^[20] Bombers can serve as both a first- and second-strike weapon. For example, a bomber armed withAGM-129 ACM missiles could be classified as a first-strike weapon and bombers that are classified as needing anaerial refueling aircraft to strike targets would constitute as asecond-strike weapon.^[3][5] If dispersed in small airfields or aboard an aircraft carrier, they can reasonably avoid a counterstrike giving them regional second-strike capacity. Aircraft such as theMirage 2000,F-15E,A-5 Vigilante,Sea Harrier, orFB-111 were tasked with land or sea-based strategic nuclear attack missions. Bombers that contain anaerial refueling fleet support intercontinental strategic operations for both heavy bombers and smaller aircraft. It also makes it possible for bombers to be alert and on standby, making these airborne assets nearly impossible to eliminate in a first strike.^[21] Strategic bombers generally fall into two categories:
  • Stealth orsupersonic bombers capable of delivering nucleargravity bombs with low risk of interception. Operational examples are the US stealthB-2 Spirit and Russian supersonicTu-160. Future examples are the US stealthB-21 Raider, Chinese stealthH-20, and Russian stealthPAK DA.
  • Bombers which carry long-range nuclear weapons, typicallyair-launched cruise missiles, and more rarelyair-launched ballistic missile. Operational examples include the USB-52 Stratofortress and RussianTu-95MS.^[22]
• Intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) allow for a long-range strike launched from a controlled environment. These missiles can also be launched, and reach targets, faster than the other legs of the triad.^{[21][dubious –discuss][20]} Because firing an ICBM is an unmistakable act, they provide stronger clarity about when a country is under attack and who the attacker is. ICBMs launched from fixed positions, likemissile silos, are vulnerable to a first strike, though their interception once aloft issubstantially difficult.^[3][5] This vulnerability, along with their general inability to be forward-deployed, weakens ICBMs' contribution to nuclear deterrence compared to bombers or submarines.^[20] Some ICBMs are mobile by either rail or road.Medium-range ballistic missiles andground-launched cruise missiles were assigned to strategic targets butbilaterally forbidden by the United States and Russia from 1987 to 2019.^[23]
• Submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) maintain a greater chance of surviving a first strike, giving the commander a second-strike capability.^[3][5] Nuclear submarines do not have fixed locations like missile silos or airfields, and they are more easily concealed than bombers. Because of their low detectability and quick mobility, SLBMs are almost invulnerable at sea.^[19] A disadvantage of SLBMs is that it might be unclear whether the destruction of a nuclear submarine was the result of an accident or an attack. Also, maintaining a force of nuclear submarines can be very expensive.^[19][21]

Tactical nuclear weapons, also known as non-strategic nuclear weapons, are used in air, land and sea warfare. Their primary use in a non-strategic war-fighting role is to destroy military forces in the battle area. But, depending on the target in today's nuclear age, they are not counted toward triad status because of the possibility that many of these systems could be used as strategic weapons. During theCold War, it was easy to point out which nuclear weapons were tactical. Each type of weapon had different capabilities that were better suited for different missions.^[24]Air-to-air missiles, rockets,surface-to-air missiles, smallair-to-ground rockets, bombs, and precision munitions have been developed and deployed withnuclear warheads. Ground forces have included tactical nuclear artillery shells, surface-to-surface rockets, land mines, medium and small man-packable nuclear engineering demolition charges, and even man-carried or vehicle-mounted recoilless rifles. Naval forces have carried weapons that include nuclear-armed naval rockets,depth charges,torpedoes, andnaval gunnery shells.

The table uses the following identifiers:

• — This country has a nuclear mission assigned to this delivery system.
• — This country does not have a nuclear mission assigned to this delivery system.
• — It is unclear if this country has a nuclear mission assigned to this delivery system.
• — This country is developing this delivery system with a nuclear mission envisioned.
• — This country had this type of weapon, but withdrew it from use.

Many countries formerly operated a wider range of strategic and especially tactical systems, especially during the Cold War. While most of these are no longer operational, Russia is the only country as of 2025 believed to operate nuclear-armedanti-ballistic missiles,surface-to-air missiles,anti-ship missilesanti-submarine weapons,depth bombs, andtorpedoes.^[25]

Nuclear weapons delivery systems by country, 2025

• v
• t
• e

Reference		[26]	[27]	[28]	[29]	[30]	[31]	[32]	[33]	[34]
Basing	Type
Land	Intercontinental ballistic missile
	Intermediate-range ballistic missile
	Medium-range ballistic missile
	Tactical ballistic missile
	Ground-launchedcruise missile
Sea	Submarine-launched ballistic missile
	Submarine-launched cruise missile
	Unmanned underwater vehicle
Air	Air-launched ballistic missile
	Air-launched cruise missile
	Gravity bomb

China's nuclear triad – aType 094-class SSBN, aDF-31 ICBM and aXi'an H-6 strategic bomber

Unlike the United States and Russia, where strategic nuclear forces are enumerated by treaty limits and subject to verification, China—a nuclear power since 1964—is not subject to these requirements. Instead, China currently has a triad structure smaller than those of Russia and the United States. China'snuclear force is closer in number and capability to those of France or the United Kingdom, making it much smaller than the American or Russian triads. The Chinese nuclear force consists mainly of land-based missiles, including ICBMs, IRBMs, tactical ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles. Unlike the US and Russia, China stores large numbers of its missiles in massive tunnel complexes; U.S. RepresentativeMichael Turner,^[35] referring to 2009 Chinese media reports, said "This network of tunnels could be in excess of 5,000 kilometers (3,110 miles) and is used to transport nuclear weapons and forces.^[36] The Chinese Army Newsletter calls this system of tunnels theUnderground Great Wall of China.^[37] China's nuclear warheads are believed to be stored in a central storage facility and not with the launchers.^[38]

China currently has oneType 092 submarine which is currently active withJL-1 Submarine Launch Ballistic Missiles (SLBM) according to the Office of Naval Intelligence.^[39][40] In addition, the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has deployed four newerType 094 submarines and plans to deploy up to eight of these Jin-class SSBN by the end of 2020.^[41][42] The Type 094 fleet usesJL-2 andJL-3 SLBMs. The Chinese fleet carried out a series of successful JL-2 launches in 2009,^[43] 2012 and 2015.^[44][45] The United States expected the 094 SSBN to carry out its first deterrent patrol in 2015 with the JL-2 missiles active.^[41] According to Pentagon report, China began to ensure that one nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarine would always on stand by for deterrence around 2023.^[46]

Although there is an aged, upgraded bomber force consisting ofXian H-6s with an uncertain nuclear delivery role. ThePLAAF has a limited capability fleet of H-6 bombers modified for aerial refueling as well as forthcoming RussianIlyushin Il-78 aerial refueling tankers.^[47] China has also introduced newer and modernized H-6 variants, including the H-6K and H-6N. The H-6K has enhanced capabilities such as launching long ranged cruise missiles like theCJ-10, while the H-6N is capable of carrying theJL-1. In addition to the H-6 bomber, there are numerous tactical fighter and fighter-bombers such as theJ-16,J-10,JH-7A andSu-30 that are all capable of carrying nuclear weapons.It is estimated that China maintains an arsenal of about 250 nuclear warheads and that it has produced about 610 nuclear warheads sincebecoming a nuclear power in 1964. China is phasing out old liquid-fueled ballistic missiles and arming several new solid-fueled missiles. In the same estimate, it is believed that China has a small inventory of air-delivered nuclear bombs. As well as production is more than likely underway of new warheads for missiles to arm the Jin-class submarines.^[38]

The U.S. intelligence community expects that China will increase their total number of warheads and long-range ballistic missiles from about 50 to exceed 100 in the next 15 years, this calculation has been sliding since 2001.^[38] Since the end of the Cold War, China is suspected to have doubled their nuclear arsenal, while the other nuclear powers under theTreaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons have cut their forces in half.^[48] APentagon report raises the possibility of China moving towards a more vigorous nuclear doctrine that will allow first use of nuclear weapons in times of war. While it is not expected that China will give up the current "no first use" policy in the near future, the Pentagon report raises concerns that "this issue has been and will continue to be debated in China. It remains to be seen, how the introduction of more capable and survivable nuclear systems in greater numbers will shape the terms of this debate or affect Beijing's thinking about nuclear options in the future."^[49]

India's nuclear triad – aArihant-class submarine, anAgni-V ICBM and aDassault Mirage 2000 fighter-bomber

India's nuclear weapons policy is that of "no first use" and "minimum credible deterrence," which means that the country will not use nuclear weapons unless they are attacked first, but the country does have the capability to induce the second strike. Before 2016, India already possessed land-based ballistic missiles and aircraft that are nuclear-capable. India's land-based arsenal includes thePrithvi-1 with a range of 150 to 600 kilometres (93 to 373 mi), theAgni-1 with a range of 700 kilometres (430 mi), theAgni-2 with a range of 2,000 kilometres (1,200 mi),Agni-P with a range of 1,000 to 2,000 kilometres (620 to 1,240 mi),Agni-3 with a range of 3,000, theAgni-4 with a range of 3,500 kilometres (2,200 mi), and theAgni-5 with a range of 7,000 kilometres (4,300 mi).^[50] These are allintermediate-range ballistic missiles, but the Agni-5 is an intercontinental range ballistic missile. An intermediate-range ballistic missile has a range of 3,000 to 5,000 kilometres (1,900 to 3,100 mi) and intercontinental missiles are missiles with the ability to travel farther than 5,500 kilometres (3,400 mi).^[51] In addition, the 5,000–8,000 kilometres (3,100–5,000 mi) rangeAgni-V ICBM was also successfully tested beginning April 2012 and entered service.^[52][53]

The country currently has four types of bombers that are capable of carrying nuclear bombs. Land and air strike capabilities are under the control ofStrategic Forces Command which is a part ofNuclear Command Authority. Their inventory of aircraft includes theSukhoi Su-30MKI,Mirage 2000H,SEPECAT Jaguar andRafale, which was purchased from France.^[50]

India completed its nuclear triad with the commissioning ofINS Arihant in August 2016, which was India's first submarine built indigenously.^{[54][55][56][57][58][59]} INSArihant is a nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine armed with 12K-15 missiles with a range of 750 kilometres (470 mi),^[60] which later got upgraded withK-4 missiles with an extended range of 3,500 kilometres (2,200 mi).^[61][62][63] In November 2017, it tested theBrahMos missile from the Sukhoi-30 MKI platform.^[64] The INSArihant was the firstSSBN to be completed under India's program. TheINS Arighat, India's second ballistic missile submarine was commissioned on 29 August 2024. This was the second SSBN of the three underway to be finished. 2 more improved and bigger Arihant class submarines are under construction, and are planned to be followed by three 13000 tonnesS5-class submarines.^[65] After the INSArihant was completed, India now possesses air-launched nuclear-capable cruise missiles, nuclear-missile-armed submarines and strategic aircraft with nuclear bombs and missiles.

Russia's early nuclear triad – aProject 629 SSB, anR-9 ICBM and aMyasishchev M-4 strategic bomber

TheSoviet Union orUnion of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), of which Russia was the largest and dominant republic, developed itsfirst nuclear weapons only a few years after the United States. The USSR entered the nuclear age in 1949 withtheir imitation of the AmericanFat Man plutonium implosion design. Although the Soviet Union was behind the U.S. in the years followingWorld War II in terms of nuclear technology development, the Russians soon closed the gap. By 1953, the U.S. successfully tested the world's first hydrogen device,Ivy Mike with a yield of about 10 megatonnes of TNT (42 PJ). It was only two years later on 12 August 1955 that the Soviet Union successfully tested their own hydrogen bomb, theRDS-6 (known as Joe-4 in America).

The development of the ICBM (Inter-continental Ballistic Missile) was led by the Soviet Union. The first-ever mid-range ballistic missile, R-5M, was created by the Soviet Union and accepted for military service on 21 July 1956. This missile had a range of 700 miles (1,100 km) with a yield of 1 megatonne of TNT (4.2 PJ). From its acceptance in 1956 until 1968 there were 48 launchers with R-5M ballistic missiles equipped with nuclear warheads deployed by the Soviet Union.^[66]

The former Soviet Union also led the way in the development of the third part of the nuclear triad,SLBM's. They launched the first SLBM, with anR-11FM ballistic missile in 1956, and in 1957 introduced submarines with two R-11FM's in 1957.^[67] However, these early submarines had to be surfaced in order to launch their missiles. It is in this aspect that the U.S. became the leader when they deployed the first SSBN,USS George Washington (SSBN-598), in 1959 withPolaris A-1 missiles able to be launched underwater, and the first successful underwater launch of a ballistic missile was in July 1960. It was not until 1963 that the Soviet Union was able to match the U.S. feat in this regard, with an R-21 missile. There was also a considerable gap between the United States employment of MRVs and MIRVs on SLBMs to that of the Russians, which the U.S. had achieved as early as 1964.

Russia's late Cold War nuclear triad – aProject 667BDRM Delfin SSBN, anR-36M2 ICBM and aTupolev Tu-95 strategic bomber

After the creation of ICBMs and improvements on distance and accuracy had been achieved, the modernization of the Soviet nuclear arsenal was undertaken. The first "shrapnel"MRVs (Multiple reentry vehicles) were successfully tested by 1970 with theR-36 (or SS-9) ICBM, and their deployment followed the next year. This meant that a single missile would now contain multiple nuclear warheads. Further development using the R-36 heavy ICBM type created theR-36M (SS-18). MRV's evolved intoMIRVs, which did not function as dispersal devices, but rather allowed independent targets for the multiple nuclear warheads. MIRV as well as single warhead R-36 ICBMS were deployed by the Soviet Union in 1975. The next generation of the Soviet ICBM was the R-36M UTTH, which increased the accuracy of the warhead and allowed for innovations that allowed the missiles to carry up to 8 warheads. The final improved generated theR-36M2 Voevoda, which allowed even more accurate attacks and increased the number of warheads to 10. Some "light" ICBMs developed by the Soviet Union included theUR-100N (SS-19) and theMR-UR-100 (SS-17), with lower launch weights and fewer warhead capabilities. MRVs, unlike MIRVs which allowed for independent targeting, had a downside known as the "fratricide effect", which refers to the inability to distance multiple warheads from each other, allowing the chance for the initial explosion to destroy the other warheads.^[68]

By 1975, there were around 1600 ICBM launchers deployed by the Soviet Union. Not only did this number exceed American estimates, but the addition of MRVs and MIRVs further amplified the destructive capabilities of Soviet ICBMs. These launchers also utilized the increases in accuracy and range from theSS-17,SS-18,SS-19 ICBM silo-based types. One final advent to the Soviet Union's development of ICBMs was the mobile-launcherSS-20 type.^[69]

MIRVs were not mentioned in theSALT I treaty (Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty) between the US and USSR in 1972, and consequently were insignificantly limited in theSALT II treaty of 1979. As a result, the increase in ICBM launchers and nuclear warheads continued by both countries. It is thought that the Soviet Union attained an advantage regarding ICBMs by the late 1970s.^[70]

In 1974, the USSR deployedSS-N-6, the first Soviet SSBN with shrapnel MRV nuclear warheads. Three years later, the Soviet Navy deployed their first SLBM with MIRV warheads, theSS-N-18 missile^[68]

As the 1980s came about, the new technology of cruise-missiles significantly altered deterrence strategies in both the US and Soviet Union. At this point, the nuclear triad maintained its importance in ensuring a second-strike capability

Russia's modern nuclear triad – aProject 955Borei-class SSBN,MZKT-79221 Transporter erector launcher for theRT-2PM2 Topol-M ICBM and aTupolev Tu-22M strategic bomber

Russia inherited the arsenal of all of the former Soviet states; this consists of silo-based as well as rail and road mobile ICBMs, sea-based SLBMs, strategic bombers, strategic aerial refueling aircraft, and long-range tactical aircraft capable of carrying gravity bombs, standoff missiles, and cruise missiles. The RussianStrategic Rocket Forces haveICBMs capable of delivering nuclear warheads: silo-basedR-36M2 (SS-18), silo-basedUR-100N (SS-19), mobileRT-2PM "Topol" (SS-25), silo-basedRT-2UTTH "Topol M" (SS-27), mobileRT-2UTTH "Topol M" (SS-27), mobileRS-24 "Yars" (SS-29)(Future replacement forR-36 andUR-100N missiles). Russian strategic nuclear submarine forces are equipped with the following SLBMs:

• R-29R "Vysota", NATO name SS-N-18 "Stingray";RSM-54 R-29RMU "Sineva", NATO name SS-N-23 "Skiff"; and theR-29RMU2.1 "Liner". These are in use with theDelta-class submarine.
• RSM-56 R-30 "Bulava", NATO name SS-NX-32, for theBorei-class submarines.

The RussianLong Range Aviation operates supersonicTupolev Tu-22M, andTupolev Tu-160 bombers and the long range turboprop poweredTupolev Tu-95. They are all mostly armed with strategic stand off missiles or cruise missiles such as theKH-15 and theKH-55/Kh-102. These bombers and nuclear capable strike aircraft such as theSukhoi Su-24 are supported byIlyushin Il-78 aerial refuelling aircraft.

The USSR was required to destroy its stock ofIRBMs in accordance with theINF treaty.

The elements of the US nuclear triad in the 1960s – aGeorge Washington-class SSBN carryingUGM-27 Polaris SLBMs, anLGM-25C Titan II ICBM and aB-52G Stratofortress strategic bomber carrying twoAGM-28 Hound Dog ALCMs and internal bombs

The origins of the United States' nuclear triad can be traced back to the 1940s, but full development was not achieved until the end of the 1950s. Its initial motivation for developing the program was that theNavy,Army, andAir Force all wanted to play a role in the operation of the country'snuclear arsenal.^[71] During this period the 'legs' of the triad were unstable, the advance of technology caused rapid obsolescence of weapon systems after only a few years; only the development of SLBMs began to give some stability to the arms race.

The United States desired the nuclear triad because it would give them a variety of platforms to deliver a deadly strike to the Soviet Union. Forcing the Soviet Union to put focus on potential attacks from the land, air, and sea would give the United States a significant advantage in terms of deterrence. Specifically, the nuclear triad was viewed as a way to complicate Soviet first strike and attack planning as well as ensure the survivability of U.S. assets.^[71]

During this timeframe the U.S. also created the triad by reducing the number of delivery systems, especially by ending any strategic role for Navy manned aircraft. A transonic seaplane capable of delivering nuclear weapons, theP6M SeaMaster, would be canceled in 1959.^[72] A carrier-based supersonic strategic bomber, theA-5 Vigilante, would be withdrawn from that role in 1963 and converted to the strategic reconnaissance role;^[73] its subsonic predecessors were retired in 1959 (A-2 Savage) or converted to non-bombing roles (A-3 Skywarrior); tactical nuclear weapons would remain on Navy ships. Excepting theAGM-28 Hound Dog, all operationalcruise missiles of the era (SM-62 Snark,RGM-6 Regulus,MGM-1 Matador andMGM-13 Mace) would be retired by 1971. Overlaps between the Army and Air Force ballistic missile programs, such as the ArmyPGM-19 Jupiter and the Air ForcePGM-17 Thor IRBMs, would be eliminated.

ICBMs were viewed by the United States as the means to attack hardened targets within the Soviet Union such as underground bunkers. Stored in protective "coffins" and later in underground silos, the newer long range missiles were accurate and could be fired quickly. During the early Cold War, the United States maintained multiple different types of ICBMs. This portion of the triad consisted of the following missiles: theCGM/HGM-16 Atlas,HGM-25A Titan I,LGM-25C Titan II,LGM-30A/B Minuteman I, andLGM-30F Minuteman II missiles. All of these were armed with a single warhead. The Atlas missiles would be retired in 1964, the Titan I missiles in 1965, and the Minuteman I missiles would be retired by 1970.

In terms of submarine launched missiles, the United States utilized various classes of submarines as the delivery vehicles. Missile submarines played an especially important role in terms of strategic deterrence. These submarines were extremely hard to locate and could be positioned right off of enemy coastlines. In terms of the nuclear triad, this leg was meant to be the most survivable. The United States commissioned various classes of submarines throughout the Cold War as new improvements were made to each class. The first submarines to carry nuclear weapons were a collection offive boats equipped with the Regulus cruise missile, which were employed in the Pacific as part of the regular strategic deterrent from 1959 to 1964. The Regulus boats were essentially a stop-gap until sufficientballistic missile submarines became available. Referred to as the "41 for Freedom," theGeorge Washington,Ethan Allen,Lafayette,James Madison, andBenjamin Franklin classes were all commissioned between 1959 and 1967.^[74] These classes of submarines carried 16UGM-27 Polaris A-1/A-2/A-3 missiles each; the first two had one warhead, the A-3 had threemultiple reentry vehicle (MRV) warheads.

Rounding out the United States' nuclear triad during the early Cold War were itslong-range bombers. This leg of the nuclear triad was the most versatile since bombers could be moved quickly and recalled if necessary to avoid unnecessary strikes. The U.S. bomber force during this timeframe consisted largely ofB-36 Peacemakers,B-47 Stratojets,B-52 Stratofortresses, andB-58 Hustlers. The B-36s would be retired in 1959, the B-47s in 1966, and the B-58s in 1970. Some B-52s would be equipped with single warheadAGM-28 Hound Dogair launched cruise missiles (ALCMs).

Throughout the 1960s, the United States steadily commissioned increasing numbers of delivery vehicles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. In 1967, the greatest number of deployment ready delivery vehicles of the decade was recorded at 2,268.^[71]

The elements of the US nuclear triad in the 1980s – test launch of aUGM-73 Poseidon C-3 SLBM, aLGM-30G Minuteman III ICBM in its silo, and aB-1 Lancer bomber

In 1970, a significant change brought about a dramatic increase in the nuclear arsenal. The 1970s saw a large increase in delivery vehicles and warheads because of the introduction of themultiple independent reentry vehicle (MIRV), which allowed for the deployment of ICBMs and SLBMs that could carry multiple warheads. Up until 1990 and theStrategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with the Soviet Union, the number of delivery vehicles possessed by the United States hovered between 1,875 and 2,200.^[71]

During the late Cold War, the United States continued to maintain multiple different types of ICBMs. This portion of the triad consisted of Titan II missiles (single warhead), Minuteman II missiles (single warhead),LGM-30G Minuteman III missiles (three-warhead), andLGM-118 Peacekeeper missiles (ten-warhead). The Titan II would be retired in 1987. The ICBM count for the United States in 1990 included 2,450 warheads in 1,000 ICBMs.^[71]

In the late Cold War most of the Polaris SSBNs would be converted to carry theUGM-73 Poseidon C-3 (10 or 14 warheads) and later theUGM-96 Trident C-4 missiles (up to 8 warheads) - theGeorge Washington andEthan Allen classes could not be upgraded to the new missiles. Along with the "41 for Freedom" classes, the United States also commissioned 18Ohio-class submarines before and after the Cold War's end.Ohio-class submarines carried Trident C-4 and later theUGM-133 Trident D-5 missiles (up to 12 warheads). In 1990, the United States was in possession of around 600 SLBMs and 5,216 warheads.^[71]

The U.S. bomber force during the late Cold War consisted ofB-52H and B-52G Stratofortresses,FB-111A Aardvarks, andB-1 Lancers. By 1990, the United States possessed 94 B-52H bombers, 76 FB-111 bombers, 96 B-1 bombers, and 2 B-2 bombers, along with a total of almost 5,000 available weapons.^[71] The FB-111s would all be retired by 1993. All of these aircraft could carryAGM-69 Short Range Attack Missiles (SRAMs) andAGM-86 ALCMs.

The elements of the post-Cold War US nuclear triad: anOhio-class SSBN, anLGM-118 Peacekeeper ICBM, and aB-2 Spirit strategic bomber

The pinnacle of the 1990s in terms of global nuclear policy was theSTART Treaty in 1991 and theSTART II Treaty in 1993. These treaties called for the reduction of nuclear warheads and delivery systems within both the Soviet Union and the United States. Specifically, the U.S. was limited to 6,000 total warheads, 4,900 warheads on ballistic missiles, and 1,600 delivery vehicles. Consequentially, the United States began reducing both its warhead and delivery vehicle counts during this time. By the time they had completed the implementation of the START Treaty in 2001, the total warhead count was 6,196 and the total delivery system count was 1,064. These values continued to shrink, and by 2009 the United States reduced its warhead and delivery vehicles counts to 2,200 and 850 respectively.^[71]

Following the Cold War, the United States continued upgrading its various types of ICBMs. Minuteman II variants were all but eliminated and continued efforts were put toward Minuteman III and Peacekeeper variants. In 2001, the United States possessed 500 Minuteman III missiles (three warheads each) and 50 Peacekeeper missiles (ten warheads each).^[71]

Within its nuclear submarine fleet, the United States eliminated the usage of the "41 for Freedom" classes of ballistic missiles submarines in favor of the more versatileOhio class. During the 1990s, the United States reached a total of 18 submarines within this class. In 2001, these 18 submarines were all deployable and could carry 24 Trident II missiles each (6 to 8 warheads on each missile).^[71]

The United States kept up to date with its strategic bomber leg of the triad following the Cold War as well. B-52G variants were phased out in favor of B-52H classes. In 2001, 94 B-52H bombers, each capable of carrying 20 cruise missiles, were active along with 21B-2 Spirit bombers each capable of carrying 16 bombs (the B-2s began to join the fleet in 1993).^[71]B-1 Lancer bombers were phased out of the triad and reoriented for different missions in an effort to honor the delivery systems limitations set by the START Treaties.

The elements of the future US nuclear triad: anColumbia-class SSBN, anLGM-35 Sentinel ICBM, and aB-21 Raider strategic bomber

The Obama Administration made clear in the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) that the United States will retain a nuclear triad for the foreseeable future. Each leg was still viewed as necessary because of how they strengthened each other's weaknesses and gave the United States plenty of options for a nuclear strike should one or multiple legs go down. Following theNew START Treaty set into place in 2010, the United States continued reducing its numbers of warheads and delivery systems with a focus on modernizing and updating its most effective platforms. The United States has released a plan to complete its downsizing efforts in 2018, reducing its 2010 numbers of 880 delivery vehicles and 2,152 warheads to 800 delivery vehicles and 1,550 warheads.^[71] In their release of the 2017NPR, the Trump Administration made clear that the United States supports global nuclear weapons elimination. PresidentDonald Trump also stated his intent to keep the US safe, as well as allies and partners. Until a time where nuclear weapons are no longer needed, the Trump Administration has also stated its intent to maintain a "modern, flexible, and resilient" nuclear armada. Since the height of theCold War, the US's nuclear armada has been reduced by over 85 percent. The Trump Administration acknowledges it faces a "more diverse and advanced nuclear-threat environment than ever before."^[75]

It is estimated that the US currently has around 475B-61 andB-83 bombs. The B61-7 is carried by the B-2, whereas the B61-3, 4, and 10 are lighter and can be carried by theF-16,F-35, and other light aircraft. These smaller bombs also yield smaller payloads due to their decreased size. The B61-11 is a more hardened bomb that can be used to destroy hardened targets such as bunkers, however it is unlikely that it can penetrate steel or concrete. The B83 is currently the largest bomb in the US arsenal. The US plans to retire it by the year 2025 after the new B61 LEP is completed.^[71]

The United States continues to operate itsMinuteman III ICBMs (three warheads each) from underground hardened silos under the command of U.S.Air Force Global Strike Command. The Peacekeeper variants were eliminated to allow for the United States to honor the reduction requirements set forth by the New START Treaty. By February 2015, the United States Air Force had deactivated all missiles of this type and filled the silos containing them with gravel. The U.S. Minuteman III ICBMs are spread between three Air Force bases which areFrancis E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming,Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana, andMinot Air Force Base in North Dakota with each of these bases in possession of 150 missiles.^[71][76] Multiple programs have been put into place and are currently in place to work on up-keeping and modernizing the United States ICBM force including the Propulsion Replacement Program, Guidance Replacement Program, Propulsion System Rocket Engine Program, Safety Enhanced Reentry Vehicle (SERV), Solid Rocket Motor Warm Line Program, Rapid Execution and Combat Targeting (REACT) Service Life Extension Program, and Fuse Replacement Programs. The Air Force plans to keep the Minuteman III program viable and updated through 2030 and is in the process of developing a potential replacement in the form of theGround Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) through various companies such asNorthrop Grumman andLockheed Martin.^[71]

The ballistic missile submarine leg of the United States' nuclear triad is still robust. Currently, the SSBN fleet consists of 14Ohio-class submarines each capable of carrying 24 Trident II missiles. These ballistic missile submarines are based out ofKings Bay, Georgia, andBangor, Washington. TheNew START Treaty has led the United States to reduce the number of missiles carried on each submarine from 24 to 20 and these reductions have been reached in 2018. In the early 2000s, the United States possessed 18Ohio-class submarines. Following START Treaty protocol, the United States enacted various programs to reach the treaty's requirements. The Backfit Program was utilized to eliminate the submarines that still carriedTrident I missiles leaving the United States withOhio-class submarines that only carriedTrident II missiles. This reduction led to the conversion of fourSSBNs toSSGNs. SSGNs are guided missile submarines which carry conventional Tomahawk cruise missiles. The United States plans to begin retiring theOhio-class submarines in 2027; a replacement for theOhio class, theColumbia-class submarine, is currently being developed. It was first scheduled to enter service in 2031.^[71] As of 2024, construction is reported to be anywhere from 12 to 36 months behind schedule.^[77][78]

The strategic bomber program for the United States still remains viable as well.B-2 andB-52H bombers still make up the entirety of the long range bomber force designed to deliver a nuclear payload. TheRockwell B-1 Lancer is also used for long range bombing missions. However, in 1997, it was modified to carry only conventional payloads. The B-1 Lancer is no longer used to deliver nuclear payloads. Currently, 76 B-52H bombers are maintained at bases inBarksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, andMinot Air Force Base in North Dakota. Along with these, 20 B-2 bombers are in service atWhiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. The United States Air Force is in the process of integrating a new long range bomber, theB-21 Raider, into service. This aircraft is scheduled to begin service in 2025.^[71] The B-21 is expected to have increased range and lower cost, though the details are classified. In 1997, the average cost of a B-2 was $737 million. The projected average cost for the B-21 Raider is $550 million per plane.^[79]

Long-Range Standoff, orLRSO weapons are another active option available to the US. Air-Launched cruise missiles (ALCM) and Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACM) are the missiles currently maintained by the Air Force. Both are carried via the B-52 bomber. The ACM's most current design gives it higher stealth capabilities than the ALCM. In 2006, the US had 1,142 ALCMs and 394 ACMs. Since then, the number of ALC missiles has been reduced to 528. By 2030, the Air Force plans to phase out the ALCM and replace them with the long range standoff (LRSO) cruise missile.^[71]

United States Strategic Command is responsible for strategic nuclear deterrence,global strike, and operating the Defense Department'sGlobal Information Grid.

By 2024 theNational Security Council had prepared an updated nuclear strategy.^[80][81]

The elements of the French nuclear triad in the 1970s –FS Redoutable SSBN, anS3 IRBM, and aDassault Mirage IV bomber

During theCold War, France obtainedballistic missile submarines, land-based missiles, and nuclear-armed bombers. France was the third country to maintain a nuclear triad. In February 1960, France performed its first nuclear weapons test codenamed "Gerboise Bleue", meaning Blue Jerboa.^[82]

In 1955, the country started Project Coelacanth, thenaval nuclear propulsion program. Their first attempt to build a nuclear ballistic missile submarine, Q.244, failed and was cancelled in 1959. The development of the land based reactor, PAT 1, allowed for Q.252 to be successful. The development of Q.252 led to the submarineRedoutable. The French produced the Mer-Sol Balistique Strategique, or M1 MSBS, a "submarine-launched ballistic missile". Between 1971 and 1980, France finished their first generation of nuclear ballistic missile submarines, which included all five submarines inRedoutable and the oneInflexible submarine. Of the five submarines in theRedoutable class, only one submarine contained anM-2 missile, theFoudroyant; The M-1 missile was put on theRedoutable andTerrible; two ships contained bothM-2 missiles andM-20 missiles. TheInflexible containedM4 missiles. At this time, TheForce Océanique Stratégique, the country's submarine fleet, contained 87 percent of the country's entire nuclear weaponry. Between 1986 and 2010, the country began work on their second generation of nuclear ballistic missile submarines, which included theTriomphant, theTéméraire, theVigilant, and theTerrible. TheTriumphant class of ships contained theM45 intermediate-range missile. TheTerrible submarine contained theM51 missile.^[82]

S2 MRBMs andS3 IRBMs were operated on standby alert in silos on the Plateau d'Albion in the Vaucluse region from 1971 to 1996.

France operated a small fleet ofDassault Mirage IV supersonic strategic bombers from 1964 to 1996.

Since the Cold War, France has scaled down their weapons program; the budget for nuclear forces has been reduced from 40 percent to 20 percent; they stopped work on ground-launched ballistic missiles; nuclear testing sites have shut down; and their total ballistic missile submarine arsenal has been lowered from five to four.^[83]

While France has drastically reduced its nuclear arsenal, it currently maintains approximately 300 nuclear weapons.^[84] France deploys fourLeTriomphant-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) on the Atlantic Coast. Out of the four, one is deployed at all times and the other three are on standby at all times. France is in the process of upgrading its current SLBMs to a newer model. The most recent addition to the French submarine fleet came in September 2010 in the form ofLe Terrible, which is equipped with the newer model of SLBMs. France plans to modernize the rest of its submarine fleet by 2020.^{[85][needs update]}

As far as air-capabilities are concerned, France maintains four separate fighter squadrons meant to act as a deterrence against foreign threats. There are 23Mirage 2000N aircraft and 20Rafale aircraft equipped with ASMP-air-launched cruise missiles (ALCM). TheCharles de Gaulle aircraft carrier also maintains approximately 24 Rafale M aircraft. The Rafale M aircraft, as well as the Mirage 2000N K3 aircraft, is equipped with an upgradedASMP-A air-launched cruise missile with a range of 500 kilometers. In February 2015,Francois Hollande, the President of France at the time, declared that "France possesses 54 ASMP-A missiles", confirming their exact number of missiles.^[85]

Elements of the British nuclear 'triad' –HMS Repulse SSBN, aPGM-17 Thor IRBM, and aAvro Vulcan bomber

TheUnited Kingdom has operated the weapon systems that belonged to each triad element, but never simultaneously; therefore, the United Kingdom has never deployed its nuclear weapons as a complete triad. From 1955 till 1984, the BritishRoyal Air Force operated nuclear-armedstrategic aircraft, and a tactical aircraft until 1998.^[86]

In January 1959, the United States, underProject Emily, transferred the land-basedThor missiles from theUnited States Air Force to theBritish Army which were operated under a dual-key arrangement until August 1963.^[87][88] In 1969, the American designedPolaris program enabled the BritishRoyal Navy to operate the submarine-launched ballistic missiles from their submarines asat-sea deterrent.^[89] If the AmericanThor missiles in British service had been retained until afterPolaris became operational, then the United Kingdom would have briefly been a classified as a triad operator.

Launch platforms and elements of the Pakistan's nuclear 'triad' –Agosta submarine, land-basedTEL system, and a Ra'ad ALCM on F-16BFalcon (artist sketch).

Pakistan is one of the eight declared nuclear weapons states in the world, with the ability and the capability to launch nuclear weapons from land, air, and sea platforms. While it possesses a diversified nuclear arsenal, Pakistani war strategists took a different approach than India and China by developing thetactically nuclear capablesubmarine-launched cruise missiles (SLCMs) on theirair-independent propulsion submarines instead.

TheShaheen-III is a medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) with a range of up to 2,750–3,000 km (1,710–1,860 mi) enhancing Pakistan's ground-based deterrence capabilities by enabling it to target distant adversaries.^[90] TheAbabeel missile is equipped withmultiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs), allowing Pakistan to target multiple locations simultaneously, improving the survivability of its nuclear forces.^[91]

TheRa'ad andRa'ad II are an air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) with a range of 350–700 km (220–430 mi), capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. It can be deployed from several Pakistan air force fighter aircraft, including theF-16A/BVipers,JF-17Thunder, andMirage IIIRose.^[92][93] These aircraft are part of Pakistan'sAir Force Strategic Command, which oversees the nuclear strike capabilities and target selections for the Pakistani military.^[94]

TheBabur-III, a submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) with a range of 450 km (280 mi), is Pakistan’s primary sea-based nuclear delivery system. It provides Pakistan with a second-strike capability, which is essential for ensuring a credible deterrent, and according to the Pakistani military, a SLCM-nuclear variant of Babur has provided Pakistan a much desired and long-sought after "credible sea-based second-strike capability, augmenting existing strategic deterrence."^[95]

Israel neither confirms nor denies possession of nuclear weapons as national policy. However, the existence of a nuclear force is often hinted at blatantly. Evidence of an advanced weapons program including miniaturized as well as thermonuclear devices has been presented, especially with the extensive photographic evidence given by former Israeli nuclear weapons assemblerMordechai Vanunu in 1986. Since the 1960s, in Dimona, they have operated a nuclear reactor and an underground plutonium-separation plant. The US Defense Intelligence Agency concluded in 1999 that Israel had produced approximately 80 warheads, and projected that their stockpile would moderately increase by 2020. They are currently estimated to have produced enough nuclear material for 115 to 190 warheads.^[38]Israel has been reported in a congressional testimony by the United States Department of Defense of having aircraft-delivered nuclear weapons as early as the mid-1960s, a demonstrated missile-based force also since the mid-1960s, an IRBM in the mid-1980s, an ICBM in the early 2000s and they are suspected of having second-strike capabilities with the arrival of theDolphin-class submarine andPopeye Turbo submarine-launched cruise missile.^[96]

Israel maintains an inventory of nuclear-capable fighter aircraft such as the long-rangeF-15E Strike Eagle,F-16 and previously theF-4 Phantom,Dassault Mirage III,A-4 Skyhawk and theNesher. Israel has a considerable and growing number of long-range tanker aircraft and aerial refueling capacity on its long-range fighter-bomber aircraft. This capacity was used in the 1985 long-rangeconventional strike against the PLO in Tunisia.^[97]

In a report by London'sSunday Times in June 2000, a missile test was reported. This being the only public evidence of a nuclear version of a single missile being tested off the coast of Sri Lanka.^[98] According to an official report that was submitted to the United States Congress in 2004,^[96] it may be that theJericho 3 with a payload of 1,000 kg that allows Israel to have nuclear strike capabilities within the entire Middle East, Africa, Asia, Europe and almost all parts ofNorth America, as well as within large parts ofSouth America and NorthernOceania. Israel also has a regional reach with its Jericho 2 IRBM force.

While the Persian Gulf War was beginning in 1991, Germany agreed to subsidize the sale of twoDolphin-class diesel-powered submarines to Israel: there was a total of six submarines that were ordered and three have been delivered so far by the Germans.^[98]Jane's Defence Weekly reports that the IsraeliDolphin-class submarines are widely believed to benuclear armed, offering Israel asecond-strike capability with a demonstrated range of at least 1500 km in a 2002 test.^[99][100]

Israel is known to have nuclear-capable aircraft and land-base missiles. With the addition of nuclear-armed submarines this would mean that they now have a full triad of land-, air-, and sea-based nuclear delivery systems some of which would be invulnerable to a first strike by an enemy for the first time in their country's history.^[38] No other nation in the Middle East is known to be in possession of nuclear weapons, even though Iran, Iraq, Syria and Libya have started development programs that were never completed.^[98]

Nuclear delivery systems are not limited to those covered in the nuclear triad. Other methods of delivery could includeorbital weapons,nuclear torpedoes andhypersonic glide vehicles. TheOuter Space Treaty bans these types of weapons from outer space, stating that "the moon and other celestial bodies shall be used for peaceful purposes only. Although the treaty bans the use of nuclear weapons in space, technology that has already been deployed legally to space could be used in support of Earth-based nuclear weapons.GPS and othersatellite navigation systems can be used for missile and bomb guidance, andreconnaissance satellites can be used to gather intelligence about enemies and targets.^[101] The existence of military assets in space increases the probability of a space-based conflict.

Anuclear torpedo is essentially a torpedo with a warhead attached to it. Russia is currently working on underseanuclear torpedo, which is referred to as the Poseidon (Status-6), according to the Pentagon.^[102] This thermonuclear warhead has the potential to hit any United States coast and radioactively contaminate the coastal regions.^[103] The innovative missile is a concern to theUnited States, because there is potential for the missile to not be stopped by the country's ballistic missile defenses. Initial reports of Status-6 were not confirmed, but it has now been confirmed^{[by whom?]} that weapon is real and capable^{[citation needed]}.

Hypersonic glide vehicles (HGVs) are capable of containing nuclear warheads, and therefore could be used in strikes against nuclear assets. HGVs were developed to be lightweight, to travel at faster speeds, and to travel in the atmosphere. The difference betweenICBMs and HGVs is that HGVs are designed to be powered by theoxygen in the atmosphere, while ICBMs have to carry an oxidant on board (which makes them heavy). Their ability to attack fast over long distance and hide from radars enables this technology to have the potential to be used as nuclear weapons.^[102]

William Perry, who served as the 19thUnited States Secretary of Defense, has spoken for the removal of the land-based missiles from the nuclear triad. Perry believes that ICBMs are turning more into liabilities than assets. Perry says it would save "considerable cost" and would prevent an accidental nuclear war. Perry had experienced a false alarm for an incoming missile which later turned out to be a computer error.^{[citation needed]} Perry's experience occurred 40 years ago, but similar false alarms have occurred since then, such as the2018 Hawaii false missile alert. Perry says that a major problem with ICBMs is that they cannot be recalled once launched in the event of a false alarm.^{[citation needed]}

American political scientistMatthew Kroenig has spoken against the removal of the land-based missiles leg of the nuclear triad. Kroenig writes that ICBMs offer defense from apre-emptive nuclear strike. If the US had hundreds of ICBMs all over the US then this first attack would be a "near-insurmountable task. Kroenig writes that these ICBMs could save "millions of American lives".^[104] A study estimated that if the US were to keep its ICBMs, a Russian nuclear attack would result in 70 million US casualties, whereas if the US were to remove its ICBMs, that number increases to 125 million US casualties.^[105] Kroenig also writes that the risk of accidental launch is less than the benefit of keeping ICBMs. Also, Kroenig says "If ICBMs are truly expendable, then there is no reason to risk an accidental nuclear war just to avoid losing them.^{[further explanation needed]} Kroenig also writes that ICBMs are the least costly leg of the triad.^[104] The annual operating cost of ICBMs is $1.4 billion for ICBMs, compared to $1.8 billion for bombers and $3.8 billion for SLBMs.^[106]

The U.S. Department of Defense defends the current triad, stating that "Without ICBMs, a conventional-only attack on the limited number of submarine and bomber bases could significantly degrade the U.S. nuclear arsenal without rising to the level of nuclear use. This significantly lowers the threshold for an attack against the U.S. homeland. Also, the Triad's diversity enables mitigation of risk if a particular leg of the Triad is degraded or unavailable."^[107]

The nuclear triad gained more attention in the American public following aRepublican Party presidential debate in December 2015. The moderator,Hugh Hewitt, had asked candidateDonald Trump a question about the triad. Trump, who would ultimatelywin the election, gave only a vague answer to the question. This suggested that he likely did not know what the nuclear triad was.^[108] Trump’s ignorance on the matter was mocked in the media, including byJohn Oliver in his showLast Week Tonight.^[109]

• Fail-deadly
• List of states with nuclear weapons
• Mutual assured destruction

• Barry, John (12 December 2009)."Do We Still Need a Nuclear 'Triad'?".Newsweek. Retrieved8 October 2010.
• Ben-David, Alon (1 October 2009)."Israel seeks sixthDolphin in light of Iranian 'threat'".Jane's Defence Weekly. Retrieved3 November 2009.
• Boyes, John (2015).Thor Ballistic Missile: The United States and the United Kingdom in Partnership. Fonthill.ISBN 978-1-78155-481-4.OCLC 921523156.
• Buttler, Tony (July 2014). "Database: North American A3J/A-5 Vigilante".Aeroplane Monthly. Vol. 42, no. 7.
• Chabolla, Jack (25 March 2017)."US Nuclear Triad Overview".large.stanford.edu. Retrieved3 April 2018.
• Collina, Tom Z. (July–August 2012). "Israel has Nuclear-Armed Sub. Report Says".Arms Control Today.42 (6): 34.JSTOR 23629351.
• Davenport, Kelsey (2012). "India Moves Closer to Nuclear Triad".Arms Control Today.42.
• Diamond, Jeremy (17 December 2015)."3 things to know about that nuclear triad". CNN Online. Retrieved10 September 2025.
• Edwards, Joe (7 June 2024)."US To Announce Bold New Nuclear Strategy".
• Feickert, Andrew (5 March 2004).Missile Survey: Ballistic and Cruise Missiles of Foreign Countries(PDF) (Report). Congressional Research Service. RL30427. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 27 June 2004. Retrieved21 June 2010.
• Ferreira-Snyman, A (12 April 2015)."Selected Legal Challenges Relating to the Military use of Outer Space, with Specific Reference to Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty".Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal.18 (3).doi:10.4314/pelj.v18i3.02.hdl:10394/15837.
• Gertler, Jeremiah (7 June 2017)."Air Force B-21 Raider Long-Range Strike Bomber"(PDF).Congressional Research Service.
• Gertz, Bill (18 February 2015)."China conducts JL-2 sub missile test".The Washington Times. Retrieved10 March 2015.
• Greene, Scott (17 October 2011)."U.S. Lawmaker Warns of China's Nuclear Strategy".China Digital Times. Retrieved18 December 2015.
• Grove, Eric J. (1987).Vanguard to Trident; British Naval Policy since World War II. Annapolis, Maryland: United States Naval Institute.ISBN 978-0-87021-552-0.OCLC 15081825.
• Haynes, Susan Turner (2016). "China's Nuclear Threat Perceptions".Strategic Studies Quarterly.10 (2).JSTOR 26271504.
• Keck, Zachary (9 March 2018)."Pakistan Has Just Tested the Ultimate Nuclear Missile".The National Interest.
• Khan, Feroz (7 November 2012).Eating Grass: The Making of the Pakistani Bomb. Stanford University Press.ISBN 978-0-8047-8480-1. Retrieved10 October 2023.
• Kristensen, Hans M.; Norris, Robert S. (27 November 2015)."Global Nuclear Weapon Inventories, 1945–2013".Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.69 (5).doi:10.1177/0096340213501363.S2CID 145692541.
• Kroenig, Matthew (2018a).The Logic of American Nuclear Strategy.ISBN 978-0190849184.
• Kroenig, Matthew (Fall 2018)."The Case for the US ICBM Force"(PDF).Strategic Studies Quarterly.
• LaGrone, Sam; Shelbourne, Mallory (12 March 2024)."Supplier Problems Put Columbia Nuclear Missile Sub at Risk for 1-Year Delay".USNI News. Retrieved4 May 2024.
• Lopez, C. Todd (18 September 2024)."With Two Nuclear-Armed Strategic Competitors, U.S. Modernization Top Priority". DOD News.
• Malik, Aman (20 April 2012)."Agni-V test launch puts India in select group".Mint. Archived fromthe original on 31 July 2012. Retrieved15 April 2017.
• Mallikarjunt, Y; Subramanian, S (27 January 2013)."India successfully test-fires underwater missile".The Hindu.
• Masood, Salman (25 April 2012)."Pakistan Says It Test-Fires Nuclear-Capable Missile".The New York Times.Archived from the original on 26 April 2012. Retrieved26 April 2012.
• Mizokami, Kyle (26 August 2017)."France's Nuclear Arsenal Could Kill Millions of People in Minutes".The National Interest. Retrieved10 April 2018.
• Mizokami, Kyle (26 November 2021)."How Pakistan Developed Its Own Nuclear Triad".The National Interest. Retrieved8 July 2023.
• Odom, William E. (1983). "The Soviet Approach to Nuclear Weapons: A Historical Review".The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.469.doi:10.1177/0002716283469001012.JSTOR 1044540.S2CID 145322589.
• Pandit, Rajat (18 October 2016)."India set to complete N-triad with Arihant commissioning".The Times of India.
• Pandit, Rajat."Indigenous sub, Arihant, completes India's nuclear triad".The Economic Times. Retrieved22 November 2016.
• Peri, Dinakar (17 October 2016)."Now, India has a nuclear triad".The Hindu. Retrieved22 November 2016.
• Podvig, Pavel (2008). "The Window of Vulnerability That Wasn't: Soviet Military Buildup in the 1970s—A Research Note".International Security.33 (1):118–138.doi:10.1162/isec.2008.33.1.118.S2CID 57568873.Project MUSE 241063.
• Polmar, Norman; White, Michael (2010).Project Azorian: The CIA and the Raising of the K-129. Naval Institute Press.ISBN 978-1-59114-690-2.
• Pubby, Manu (14 July 2018)."India's first Nuclear submarine INSArihant ready for operation, passes deep sea test".The Economic Times.
• Reif, Kingston; Sharp, Travis (16 May 2013)."Pruning the Nuclear Triad? Pros and Cons of Submarines, Bombers, and Missiles".The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. Retrieved2 April 2018.
• Rutherford, Ian P. "NATO's New Strategic Concept, Nuclear Weapons, and Global Zero".International Journal.66.
• Spring, Baker; Bendikova, Michaela (27 January 2012)."Time to Modernize and Revitalize the Nuclear Triad".The Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 30 January 2012. Retrieved18 December 2015.
• Starr, Barbara; Cohen, Zachary (10 February 2018)."US says Russia 'developing' undersea nuclear-armed torpedo".CNN. Retrieved10 April 2018.
• Stassis, Christina (6 June 2024)."US test-fires two unarmed Minuteman III ballistic missiles".
• Stone, Mike (2 April 2024)."US Navy ship building schedules hit by supply-chain woes, labor shortages".Reuters. Retrieved4 May 2024.
• Suellentrop, Chris (15 November 2001)."What Is the Nuclear Triad?".Slate.
• Sutyagin, Igor (13 June 2016). "Russia's underwater "doomsday drone": Science fiction, but real danger".Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.72 (4):243–246.Bibcode:2016BuAtS..72d.243S.doi:10.1080/00963402.2016.1194617.S2CID 148003388.
• Taylor, Marcus; Tamerlani, Eric (3 June 2013)."Pentagon Sees China Progressing on SLBM".Arms Control Association. Retrieved28 October 2015.
• Thapar, Vishal (10 May 2014)."India tests 3,000 km range n-missile in secret".Sunday Guardian. London. Archived fromthe original on 20 May 2015. Retrieved3 March 2016.
• Torode, Greg; Baptista, Eduardo (4 April 2023)."Analysis: China's intensifying nuclear-armed submarine patrols add complexity for U.S., allies".Reuters.
• Wolverton, Mark (March 2012)."SeaMonsters of the Navy".Smithsonian Air & Space.
• Woolf, Amy (10 March 2016)."U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues"(PDF). Retrieved5 April 2018.
• Woolf, Amy (13 February 2018)."Nonstrategic Nuclear Weapons"(PDF).Federation of American Scientists. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 25 May 2006. Retrieved4 April 2018.
• Wynn, Humphrey (1997).RAF Strategic Nuclear Deterrent Forces, Their Origins, Roles and Deployment, 1946–1969. A documentary history. London: The Stationery Office.ISBN 0-11-772833-0.
• Zhang, Boahui (2007). "The Modernization of Chinese Nuclear Forces and Its Impacts on Sino-U.S. Relations".Asian Affairs: An American Review.34 (2).doi:10.3200/AAFS.34.2.87-100.S2CID 153811484.

• Nuclear triad
• Nuclear strategy

• CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown
• Articles with short description
• Short description is different from Wikidata
• Use American English from April 2019
• All Wikipedia articles written in American English
• Use dmy dates from July 2016
• All accuracy disputes
• Articles with disputed statements from April 2025
• Pages using multiple image with auto scaled images
• Wikipedia articles in need of updating from February 2023
• All Wikipedia articles in need of updating
• Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from May 2025
• All articles with unsourced statements
• Articles with unsourced statements from May 2025
• Articles with unsourced statements from May 2021
• Articles with unsourced statements from February 2021
• Wikipedia articles needing clarification from May 2021
• CS1: unfit URL