Why Nuclear? Why Now?
The world is in an unprecedented era of nuclear tripolarity: a three-way strategic competition between the US, Russia, and China.
On 5 February 2026, New START—the last arms control treaty limiting the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals—expired with no successor under negotiation. For the first time since the 1970s, there are no bilateral limits on US and Russian nuclear arsenals.
There are currently ~12,200 nuclear weapons worldwide, approximately 2,100 of them on high alert (meaning they can be launched within minutes of a presidential order). China is building roughly 100 warheads per year, on track to exceed 1,000 by 2030. Russia is testing hypersonic glide vehicles, nuclear-powered cruise missiles, and space-based nuclear weapons. The US has ambitious plans for a “Golden Dome” missile defense system. And transformative AI is being integrated into military systems faster than the norms to govern it are developed.
A world in which nuclear weapons spread and are used is not inevitable. Over eight decades, leaders, scientists, scholars, and engaged citizens have made a real difference in reducing catastrophic risks from nuclear weapons. We seek to build on that record, focusing on the most extreme risks: nuclear war involving the US, Russia, and China.
Why Philanthropy?
Philanthropy fills a structural gap: funding risk-reduction work that governments and militaries cannot or will not do themselves.
This is a proven model. The philanthropically-funded Pugwash Conferences brought scientists together across the Iron Curtain, helping shape the 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty and the 1972 ABM Treaty. The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, which enabled the largest verified reduction in nuclear arsenals in history, was incubated by philanthropy, translating a diffuse fear of loose nukes into a concrete policy proposal at precisely the moment the Soviet Union collapsed.
That track record makes the current funding gap all the more striking.
Total philanthropic funding for nuclear risk reduction stands at just ~$45 million per year globally, with less than half directed toward the work most relevant to reducing catastrophic risk. The MacArthur Foundation, previously the field’s largest funder, exited in 2020, and their funding was never fully replaced.
The United States plans to spend ~$946 billion on nuclear forces over the next decade, while the federal budget for civilian nuclear risk reduction (arms control, safeguards, and threat reduction) is ~$2.3 billion per year and faces proposed cuts. Philanthropic funding can move faster than government budgets and reach work that official channels don’t support.
In a moment of heightened danger, that flexibility matters.
Why Longview?
Longview’s Nuclear Weapons Policy Fund (NWPF) was built to fill this gap. We have four full-time nuclear grantmakers with backgrounds at OpenAI, the Department of Defense, and a US national lab, and have made more than 50 grants to date across three mechanisms:
- Applied research: Funding the analysis and frameworks that shape how policymakers understand nuclear risks and evaluate solutions.
- International dialogues: Supporting Track 1.5 and Track 2 diplomacy that maintains communication channels between major powers when official channels are limited.
- Talent development: Placing nuclear risk experts in high-leverage government and policy roles.
For our current grantmaking priorities and active funding opportunities, visit the Nuclear Weapons Policy Fund page.
Recent News
Consortium to Reduce Nuclear Dangers. Longview co-leads the Consortium to Reduce Nuclear Dangers alongside Carnegie Corporation of New York, PAX sapiens, Founders Pledge, and the Global Challenges Foundation. The Consortium’s first call for proposals drew nearly 500 applications worldwide and funded $5.4 million in projects. A second call for proposals closed on May 29, 2026.
