One Decision America Wants to Test Nuclear Weapons. How Would it Actually Work?
Nov 6, 2025
Corey Hinderstein, former deputy administrator for defense nuclear nonproliferation, dives into the implications of potential U.S. nuclear testing. She discusses President Trump's unexpected comments and clarifies that any tests would primarily serve political signaling rather than scientific purposes. Hinderstein also reflects on her crucial role in identifying Iran’s nuclear facility and its effects on the JCPOA. She emphasizes the risks of renewed testing for global stability, especially regarding adversaries like China and Russia.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Simulation Replaced Routine Nuclear Blasts
- The U.S. already uses advanced simulation and data from past tests to understand weapon performance without live detonations.
- Corey Hinderstein says three decades of science, machines and supercomputers replaced routine underground testing.
Testing Would Be More Message Than Science
- A new underground test would likely be political signaling rather than a scientific necessity.
- Hinderstein warns such a demonstration would mainly send a message, not answer pressing technical questions.
Don't Hand Rivals An Excuse To Test
- Avoid restarting full-scale nuclear tests because it narrows the U.S. advantage and invites rivals to follow.
- Hinderstein cautions that testing first could help China or Russia close capability gaps we already hold.
