Could there be a new nuclear arms race?

The expiration of the New Start Treaty reducing the size of the nuclear arsenals held by the United States and Russia has inevitably led to fears that the world is about to see a so-called nuclear arms race with each of the two signatories to that treaty rushing ahead to build more and more warheads and missiles. But it's not in their interest to start spending vast new sums on increasing the size of the arsenals. There are already way too many to make the Cold War's Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) concept any less or more effective. Russia certainly can't afford to build and field hundreds or thousands more nukes, and nor can the US. The focus will surely be more on modernising the nukes now getting old and potentially unreliable, rather than increasing stocks. However, when a treaty of such historic importance expires without any talk of urgent meetings to extend it, should the world be worried? Donald Trump's approach is actually the right one. Instead of trying to extend the New Start Treaty, he says he wants a totally new treaty and for it to be signed by China as well. This is surely the way forward. China will resist it but with Beijing planning to build its stock of nuclear warheads from 600 to at least 1,000 by 2030, there is every reason to persuade Beijing to join a treaty to keep nuclear stocks to a limited level, even though China is far behind the American and Russian stockpiles. Meanwhile, the real arms race will continue to be in developing hypersonic missiles, nuclear or conventionally armed. A new treaty limiting these weapons would make sense, too. PLEASE BUY AGENT REDRUTH, MY NEW SPY THRILLER - AMAZON, ROWANVALE BOOKS, WATERSTONES.