The Doomsday Clock is set to 90 seconds: The global security tipping point amid great power rivalry and multiple crises.

On January 27, 2026, in the press hall of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C., Alexandra Bell, President and CEO of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, along with members of the Science and Security Board, unveiled the latest setting: the Doomsday Clock, symbolizing threats to human survival, was set to 85 seconds to midnight. This time is 4 seconds closer than the 89 seconds in 2025, making it the closest to midnight—the theoretical moment of global catastrophe—since the clock was established in 1947. The setting is based on the escalating aggression, confrontation, and nationalism among nuclear powers such as Russia, China, and the United States, as well as the intertwining risks of the collapse of nuclear arms control systems, ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, the militarization of artificial intelligence, and the climate crisis.

Nuclear Risk: The Arms Race and Strategic Deterrence on the Brink of Losing Control

The nuclear field shows no positive trends in 2025. This is the clear judgment issued by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. The last major pillar of nuclear arms control between the United States and Russia—the New START Treaty—is set to expire on February 5, 2026. In September 2025, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed extending the treaty limits for another year, but as of the clock adjustment date, U.S. President Donald Trump, who had been back in the White House for a full year, had not yet given an official response. Western security analysts are divided on whether to accept Putin's proposal. A more dangerous signal is that in October 2025, Trump ordered the U.S. military to restart nuclear weapons testing procedures, more than thirty years after the last such test. Since the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty opened for signature in 1996, no nuclear state has conducted explosive nuclear tests except for North Korea in 2017.

The war in Ukraine has entered its fourth year, with no end in sight. In December 2025, Russia released a video showcasing what it claimed to be the Oleshnyk nuclear-conventional dual-capable hypersonic missile deployed in Belarus. This move is widely interpreted as aimed at enhancing Russia's strike capability against targets across Europe. Analysts point out that forward-deploying tactical nuclear weapons near NATO borders significantly lowers the threshold for nuclear use, increasing the risks of miscalculation and escalation of conflict.

In Asia, the situation remains equally tense. China continues to modernize and expand its nuclear arsenal, with its number of nuclear warheads and delivery capabilities steadily increasing. According to analysis by Bell, a former senior official at the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability, if the world returns to large-scale nuclear testing, China would be the country to benefit the most. Meanwhile, the nuclear standoff on the Korean Peninsula persists. In May 2025, India and Pakistan experienced another border conflict, and any large-scale military friction between these two nuclear-armed neighbors carries the potential for nuclear escalation. The Iran nuclear issue has also intensified again due to U.S.-Israeli airstrikes against Iran in the summer of 2025, with Tehran's capability and intent to develop nuclear weapons remaining an unresolved threat.

Emerging Technologies: The Dual Uncontrollability of Artificial Intelligence and Biotechnology

This year's assessment report has, for the first time, elevated the militarization of artificial intelligence and the potential misuse of biotechnology to the level of existential threats alongside nuclear weapons and climate change. Scientists are concerned that artificial intelligence is being rapidly integrated into command, control, communications, and intelligence systems in the absence of effective international oversight. This could lead to combat decision-making speeds exceeding the scope of effective human supervision, triggering unpredictable escalations of conflict. A more profound impact lies in the fact that generative artificial intelligence and social bots are creating and disseminating disinformation on an unprecedented scale and efficiency. At the press conference, Maria Ressa, the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize laureate and investigative journalist from the Philippines, warned that the world is experiencing an information apocalypse. Technologies, from social media to generative AI, are designed not on the basis of facts but on probability, which is systematically eroding the foundation of global public discourse and making fact-based collective action nearly impossible.

In the field of biotechnology, risks are equally imminent. The rapid advancement of cutting-edge technologies such as synthetic biology, especially the development of synthetic mirror life, has theoretically made it easier to design and create novel pathogens. However, the international community lacks a coordinated regulatory framework and response plan for this. Daniel Holtz, a physicist at the University of Chicago and Chairman of the Scientific Advisory Committee, points out that the world is severely underprepared for potentially devastating biological threats. The involvement of artificial intelligence may further lower the technical barriers to developing biological weapons and accelerate their design process, creating a vicious cycle of AI-empowered biological threats.

Climate Crisis and Leadership Failure: Amplifiers of Structural Risks

Despite record-breaking heatwaves, droughts, and floods occurring in many parts of the world in 2025, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists believes that countries have failed to reach substantive agreements in addressing climate change, with actions lagging far behind. The report specifically points out that the Trump administration's domestic policies vigorously promoting fossil fuels and hindering the development of renewable energy are a major force of regression in global climate cooperation. The climate crisis is not only an existential threat in itself but also acts as a threat multiplier, exacerbating geopolitical tensions, resource competition, and global instability, forcing large-scale population displacement and thereby increasing the risk of conflicts between nations.

The deeper reason lies in the structural failure of global leadership. Bell describes the current shift of some major powers using the concepts of neo-imperialism and Orwellian governance. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the United States’ unilateral military operations in Latin America (such as deploying troops to capture Venezuelan President Maduro), Trump’s repeated remarks about annexing Greenland—an autonomous territory of Denmark—and the damage he inflicted on transatlantic security cooperation are all subverting the international order and norms established since World War II. The zero-sum, winner-takes-all mindset among major powers is eroding the foundation of international cooperation necessary to address nuclear war, climate change, biological threats, and the dangers of artificial intelligence. This divisive "us versus them" dynamic, as Holtz points out, increases the likelihood that everyone loses.

Information Abyss and Individual Action: Finding a Way Out in the Tick of a Second Hand

The Doomsday Clock shifting from minute measurements to second-by-second ticking itself reflects the urgency of an impending crisis. The furthest moment from midnight was in 1991, when the Cold War ended and the U.S. and Soviet Union signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I), setting the clock back to 17 minutes before midnight. History has shown that through bold and substantive cooperation, the risk of regression can be reversed.

For individuals, action is not in vain. Scientists emphasize that it is crucial to openly and rationally discuss these existential threats. Combating misinformation and adhering to fact-based public discourse are the first steps in preserving the foundation of societal cognition. In terms of climate action, individual choices in consumption, energy usage habits, and waste reduction collectively create pressure at the societal level, which can drive policy changes. Maria Ressa's call hits the core: without facts, there is no truth; without truth, there is no trust. Without these three, we cannot have a shared reality. This shared reality is a prerequisite for any global collaboration in addressing crises.

An 85-second reading is a piercing alarm; it is not a precise scientific prediction but a powerful rhetorical tool designed to break through numbness and awaken attention. It points not to an inevitable fate, but to the dangerous endpoint of the current path. The key to turning back the clock remains in the hands of national leaders and the international community, depending on whether they can turn away from narrow nationalist competition and once again embrace cooperation based on rules and facts. Each passing second adds weight to this choice.