Over the past eight decades, the world has come a long way from the creation of the first nuclear warheads to the formation of a multi-level global deterrence system based on nuclear balance. According to an analysis conducted by the Experts Club information and analytical center based on statistics from the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), the most rapid growth in the number of nuclear weapons occurred between 1945 and 1986. After the first atomic bombs were tested in the US in 1945, the Soviet Union joined the race, and by the 1950s, an arms race had begun, in which the US had the upper hand in the early stages, with over 3,000 warheads.
This period was marked by global confrontation within the framework of the Cold War, an arms race, and the active expansion of the nuclear club.
In the 1960s, the USSR gradually caught up with the US in terms of numbers and eventually surpassed it. The race peaked in 1986, when the total number of nuclear warheads in the world reached a record high of almost 70,000, of which more than 40,000 belonged to the Soviet Union.
After the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, the US and Russia initiated a large-scale reduction of their arsenals, removing some of the warheads from combat duty or disposing of them in accordance with international agreements. By 2023, the total number of nuclear warheads in the world had decreased to approximately 12,500, of which about 9,600 are active, while the rest are in reserve or awaiting dismantlement.
Today, there are nine countries in the world that officially possess nuclear weapons. The largest arsenals are held by Russia (5,889 units) and the United States (5,244 units). China is actively building up its nuclear capabilities and already has about 410 warheads. France and the United Kingdom have 290 and 225 units, respectively. India and Pakistan have about 170 and 165 warheads, respectively, and Israel has an estimated 90. North Korea is estimated to have up to 30 warheads, but its potential is considered highly uncertain due to the country’s secrecy. South Africa is a special case, as it is the only country that voluntarily renounced nuclear weapons, completely dismantling its arsenal in the 1990s.
“The dynamics of change in nuclear capabilities demonstrate the extraordinary flexibility and, at the same time, vulnerability of the global security system. For many years, nuclear weapons have been not only an element of deterrence but also an instrument of political blackmail, allowing individual states to influence the international agenda. Today, we are seeing an alarming trend: despite the overall reduction in stockpiles in leading countries such as the US and Russia, certain countries — primarily China and North Korea — are demonstrating growing ambitions, indicating a potential return to the arms race. And if the international community fails to develop effective control and limitation mechanisms, we risk facing a new phase of nuclear confrontation, which will be even more dangerous due to the presence of unstable regimes, technological breakthroughs, and cyber threats,” comments Maxim Urakin, founder of the Experts Club analytical center.
In conclusion, it should be emphasized that the current nuclear security architecture needs to be revised. The conditions of the new geopolitical reality require not only maintaining parity, but also creating international mechanisms capable of preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons and reducing the risk of their use in new types of conflicts. Without global dialogue, transparency, and trust, the future of global security will remain under threat.
For more information, visit the Experts Club YouTube channel.
In the winter of 2025, Vertex Pharmaceuticals presented the results of the first large-scale study (phase I/II) of zimislecel (formerly VX-880), a stem cell-based drug. This experimental treatment aims to restore the cells of the islets of Langerhans in the liver of patients.
The trial involved 14 patients with severe type 1 diabetes and hypoglycemia detection disorders. All participants received a single infusion of zimislecel into the hepatic vein and initial immunosuppressive therapy without glucocorticoids. According to data from one year, 10 out of 12 completely stopped insulin injections, becoming insulin-independent, while the remaining two patients reduced their insulin dose by 92% on average. All participants normalized their HbA1c levels (<7%) and spent more than 70% of their time in the glycemic range of 70-180 mg/dL.
Side effects:
• Neutropenia was observed in 3 patients;
• Two fatalities were recorded: one from cryptococcal meningitis (off-protocol), the other from severe cognitive pathology unrelated to treatment.
The discontinuation of insulin therapy in 83% of participants is a very significant achievement, indicating the possibility of restoring endogenous insulin secretion. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) called the data “unprecedented” after three stages of presentation at the ADA-2025 conference in Chicago.
However, it should be noted that the study was small (12–14 participants) and short (12 months); large-scale control experience is needed. Data on long-term efficacy, safety, and commercial affordability are not yet known.
Phase III has now begun, with approximately 50 patients expected to participate. The next results are expected at the end of the year, after which the FDA application process will begin.
The drug is positioned as a breakthrough “functional remission” for a group of patients with severe diabetes and a tendency to hypoglycemic events. If its effectiveness is fully confirmed, it will be a global revolution in the treatment of type 1 diabetes.
The US Treasury Department has again granted a postponement until July 29 on the application of sanctions against Serbia’s NIS, according to a statement from the company. Energy Minister Dubravka Jedovic-Handanovic, quoted by Serbian media, said that “sanctions against NIS have been officially postponed, as confirmed in writing last night.”
Serbia has previously received several postponements of sanctions against NIS from the US, most recently until June 27.
As reported, on January 10, the US imposed sanctions against two Russian oil companies, Gazprom Neft and Surgutneftegaz, as well as their subsidiaries. The SDN List also includes Gazprom Neft’s Serbian subsidiary, NIS. The US then postponed the imposition of sanctions against NIS.
At the end of February, Gazprom Neft transferred 5.15% of NIS shares to Gazprom. Gazprom Neft now owns 44.85% of NIS shares, while Gazprom owns 11.3%. Another 29.87% of NIS shares are owned by Serbia, with the remainder held by minority shareholders.
Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić reported that the US is demanding the complete withdrawal of Russian capital from NIS. He recalled that in 2008, the Serbian government sold control of NIS to Russia’s Gazprom Neft, and over the past years, the Russian company and NIS have contributed to significant revenues for the Serbian budget, as well as the development of many projects.
NIS is the only company in Serbia engaged in the exploration and production of hydrocarbons, and it also owns a large oil refinery in the city of Pančevo. The company dominates the Serbian petroleum products market, and the NIS network of gas stations is present in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, and Romania, with a total of more than 400 stations.
Ahead of the annual Danube Day, experts and environmentalists are drawing attention to the large-scale environmental threats facing Europe’s largest river system. Over the past 150 years, the Danube has lost about 80% of its natural floodplains and wetlands due to human intervention, dam construction, hydropower, active shipping, and river regulation. This has led to a sharp decline in biodiversity, the disappearance of sturgeon fish, and a weakening of the ecosystems’ ability to withstand floods and droughts.
The total length of the Danube is approximately 2,857 km. It is the most international river in Europe, flowing through or serving as the border of ten countries.
In Germany — about 214 km,
in Austria — 294 km,
in Slovakia — 166 km,
in Hungary — 334 km,
in Croatia — 129 km,
in Serbia — 269 km,
in Bulgaria — 148 km,
in Romania — 825 km,
in Moldova — 49 km,
in Ukraine — about 109 km.
Approximately 83 million people live in the river basin, more than 20 million of whom depend on the Danube as a source of drinking water. The capitals of four European countries are located along the Danube: Vienna, Bratislava, Budapest, and Belgrade.
Among the most serious problems are:
pollution with organic and toxic substances coming from sewage and agricultural land;
clogging with household waste, including plastic;
climate change and water level fluctuations;
invasive species;
construction of dams and hydroelectric power plants that interfere with fish migration;
poaching of sturgeon for black caviar.
Hydraulic structures such as the Iron Gate dam on the border between Serbia and Romania have completely blocked the path to spawning grounds for dozens of fish species.
The WWF Living Danube Partnership initiative has already restored more than 1,700 hectares of wetlands and improved water supply over an area of 3,700 hectares.
The LIFE-Boat 4 Sturgeon project is working to conserve sturgeon, create a genetic bank, and restore populations.
Rational water use systems are being developed, water purification filters are being introduced, and sustainable land use is being implemented.
Companies operating in the Danube basin are being held accountable for water resources.
The Danube remains a vital river for tens of millions of people and the last refuge for unique species of fish and birds. The conservation and restoration of the Danube requires international coordination, a systematic approach to nature conservation, and conscious policies on the part of the countries in the region. The river that Strauss wrote about in his famous waltz “On the Beautiful Blue Danube” must retain its natural character in the 21st century.
The Architecture of Resilience Veterans Institute offers opportunities for:
Free education* in over 30 specialties and >100 educational programs
Retraining, courses, second higher education, master’s and postgraduate studies
Psychological support and rehabilitation
Participation in projects for the restoration of Ukraine
Partnership programs with employers (Axor, Barks, Google, Microsoft, Cisco, etc.)
Training formats: full-time, part-time, online.
We work with communities throughout Ukraine.
Individual support from admission to employment.
We invite everyone to online or offline meetings with our team. We will tell you:
▪️ how to apply
▪️ what benefits veterans and their children are entitled to
▪️ how to receive compensation for training
▪️ which educational programs are most relevant for reconstruction
Program details:
www.Veterano.info
Write to us or leave a request on the website:
+38 073 94 96 179
+38 050 22 35 182
+38 067 49 81 098
center@uvc.in.net
veterano@knuba.edu.ua
Head: Artem Goncharenko – +38 073 177 72 73
Let’s build the future together. Start with education today!
Partner universities:
• Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture
• National University of Physical Education and Sports of Ukraine (NUPESU) — a key institution on the basis of which a training and rehabilitation center for veterans has been created.
• Western Ukrainian National University
• Yuri Kondratyuk Poltava Polytechnic National University
• Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University
• National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine
• Drohobych National Pedagogical University
*“Free education” refers to participation in state compensation programs, grants, scholarships, and support from employers.
Important: admission during the basic admission campaign within the standard terms.
During its spring offensive, Russian forces took control of one of Ukraine’s most promising lithium deposits — the Shevchenkivske site in Donetsk region. Previously under development by an American critical minerals company, the site was seen as a key asset in the growing economic partnership between Kyiv and Washington in the field of strategic resources. Its capture now poses serious risks to future joint projects and has already raised concerns among Western investors.
The Shevchenkivske deposit contains significant reserves of spodumene — a mineral from which lithium is extracted. Lithium is essential for manufacturing batteries used in electric vehicles and energy storage systems. Ukraine had earlier signed a framework agreement with the United States on cooperation in the field of critical raw materials, including the development of domestic lithium, titanium, and rare earth element extraction — crucial for the West’s green energy transition. The agreement envisioned attracting investment into Ukrainian subsoil resources. However, with Shevchenkivske now under Russian control, the feasibility of that cooperation is under threat.
Myroslav Zhernov, the director of the company holding the license for the site, confirmed the loss in a comment to The New York Times. According to him, the battle for the deposit lasted several weeks: “It was very hot. They were bombing with everything they had. And now they’re there.” Zhernov warned that this may not be the end: “If the Russians advance farther, they will control more and more deposits.”
The New York Times reports that signs of activity have already been observed on the occupied territory: an assessment of reserves is underway, and preparations for future extraction may be in progress. In this way, control over lithium could give the Kremlin not only military but also geoeconomic advantages. The article notes that Russia is already leveraging its influence in global raw materials supply chains, particularly in uranium markets.
Although Ukraine still possesses two other major lithium deposits in its western regions, Shevchenkivske was considered the most promising due to its high spodumene concentration — up to 90%. In peacetime, the development of this site could have become not only a source of revenue, but a strategic lever for integrating Ukraine into Western critical materials markets.
Former head of the State Service of Geology and Mineral Resources, Roman Opimakh, explained that such investments are subject to enormous risks during wartime: “Security and control over a deposit is the main prerequisite. The military threat scares away investors, and the loss of such a site effectively nullifies any near-term development plans.”
Observers note that the war is increasingly taking on characteristics of economic conflict. Russia is not only destroying infrastructure but is actively targeting resources that could be useful to itself or potentially strengthen Ukraine. Gaining control over lithium assets allows for pressure on Western corporations and contributes to reshaping global dependencies.
Despite the loss, Zhernov said his company is not giving up on investing in Ukraine and is exploring other options. However, he admitted the situation has fundamentally changed risk assessments: “Before, we saw this project as a driver of economic growth. Now — it’s just another front in the war.”
Earlier, the Experts Club information and analysis center produced a detailed video analysis of the prospects for rare earth element mining in Ukraine.
