The size of China's nuclear arsenal is increasing, though its pace and objectives remain poorly understood, raising fundamental questions about U.S. deterrence and an arms-control system designed for a different era. Experts disagree sharply on the response — some call for renewed nuclear dominance, others for restraint and eventual disarmament — and no consensus has formed. That's not because the questions are unanswerable. It's because much of the disagreement rests on assumptions experts hold but rarely state out loud. Deterrence and arms control are usually treated as separate issues. They aren't. An arms control agreement is only as sound as the deterrence logic behind it — so progress on one requires clarity on the other. Simultaneously, the stakes are rising: friction in Asia and Europe, the rollout of Golden Dome, and the expiration of New START all raise the cost of the US policy community's continued ambiguity about its own position. Ambiguity comes at a cost. Adversaries may read it as an opening; allies, as unreliability.