US President Donald Trump unveiled a new missile defence proposal last year that he dubbed the Golden Dome. A glorified version of Israel’s Iron Dome, Trump’s proposal conjures images of opulence and invincibility, envisioning a nationwide force-field of lasers and interceptors that would render nuclear bombs useless.
However, the catchy name may be better than the plan itself, with experts cautioning that the Golden Dome could prove costly, dangerous and unrealistic. As with most dreams gilded in gold, the price tag is likely to eclipse the promise (if the technology can be made to work at all) while simultaneously threatening decades of nuclear deterrence by undermining the doctrine of mutually assured destruction.
Trump has claimed his system will “change history”, comparing it to Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defence Initiative (better known as Star Wars). But history has shown that these sorts of projects often face delays and budget overruns and can be eclipsed by unforeseen technological developments that make them redundant before they even come online.
If Trump’s Golden Dome project proceeds in its current form it would mark the most expensive defence undertaking since the War on Terror, and if the Pentagon’s track record is anything to go by it could blow past every initial estimate and still be obsolete by the time of completion.
Budget overruns
The US congressional budget office has warned that the project could cost more than $800bn over its lifecycle, potentially dwarfing even the F35 programme for overspend. The famously unreliable fighter jet was initially estimated to cost just $200bn to develop and deploy, but has already crossed $2-trillion in total projected costs over its lifetime.
The Golden Dome could easily face similar cost overruns considering the technology. More than just a single type of weapon, Trump’s ambitious plan relies on the complex integration of space, cyber, electronic, radar and kinetic technologies, each of which comes with its own technical vulnerabilities (requiring constant upgrades) and probable cost inflation.
Lasers, for instance, have long been touted as the next leap in missile defence. However, after decades of research most laser defence systems remain underpowered, vulnerable to weather and exorbitantly expensive to deploy in the field. This is just one component of what remains a risky and potentially unworkable gambit on invincibility.
In an age of renewed great power competition, especially with China and Russia, impenetrable defence systems risk undermining the existing balance of military power, which has prevented nuclear states from engaging in direct conflict. If the US moves closer to invulnerability, others may feel compelled to build more offensive capabilities to overwhelm such a system.
New arms race
China’s recent expansion of its intercontinental ballistic missile silos and Russia’s investment in hypersonic glide vehicles already indicate the limits and dangers of America’s ambitions. As such, in trying to make the US safer the Golden Dome may simply trigger a new arms race that undermines this objective.
Trump subsequently suggested that he hopes to increase US military spending from $900bn to $1.5-trillion a year. It was an arms race with the US that bankrupted the Soviet Union, and this time, already trillions of dollars in debt, it could be the de-industrialised US that fails to keep up. Washington should be wary of making the same mistake.
The US produces only about 12 Patriot air defence batteries a year, and the dollar has already declined dramatically relative to gold as a result of excessive US federal government spending. As such, Washington may lack the financial and productive resources to build the Golden Dome, with the US already running short on air defence assets for Ukraine, Taiwan and Israel.
The political consequences of putting weapons in space is another major concern, potentially leading to attacks on the satellite systems humanity relies on for communication.
The White House is also reportedly seeking alternative contractors to Elon Musk’s Space X due to the breakdown in relations between the billionaire and the US president. This could further delay a project that might have benefited from Musk’s rocket-making expertise. When national security is affected by personal grievances Houston certainly has a problem.
The political consequences of putting weapons in space is another major concern, potentially leading to attacks on the satellite systems humanity relies on for communication. According to media reports, Iran has already learnt how to block Starlink on its territory, with China and Russia rumoured to have developed a “kill switch” to disable the technology.
However, the biggest issue with the Golden Dome may be that it simply won’t work. Offensive weaponry is more cheaply produced than air defence systems. Drone swarms can overwhelm interceptors, allowing strikes on the air defence batteries from hypersonic missiles. This makes air defence systems prohibitively expensive in a war of attrition.
In an era of hypersonics, conventional air defence assets are already obsolete. Russia, China, North Korea and Iran all have hypersonic capabilities. In other words, they can deploy missiles that maintain high manoeuvrability at speeds of Mach 5 (6,174 km/h) and higher.
Russia has the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle, which is capable of sharp manoeuvres at Mach 27 and can be incorporated into Russia’s intercontinental ballistic missile arsenal, giving it global range. In addition, Russia has Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles that can reach Mach 9, Oreshnik, with multiple independent warheads, and the Burevestnik, a nuclear-powered missile with unlimited range.
China has the nuclear capable DF-ZF Hypersonic Glide Vehicle (HGV) as well as the YJ-21 anti-ship missile, which can change direction at high speed in the terminal phase. Both weapons reach Mach 10. North Korea has the Hwasong 8 (Mach 5) and Iran has the Fattah 2 (Mach 12).
Dangerous fantasy
As such, the Golden Dome could prove a dangerous fantasy that bankrupts the US without ever working. Rivals such as Russia, China and Iran would respond by building larger stockpiles of missiles to saturate US defences while further developing hypersonics capable of evading interception.
These states would also invest heavily in decoys and radar-absorbing materials to neutralise Golden Dome sensors, resulting in wasted resources and escalating global tensions. Chinese scientists have already developed heat-absorbing materials that can function at temperatures up to 700°C, making Chinese missiles impossible to detect and intercept.
China’s productive base would allow them to mass-produce these decoys to overwhelm and exhaust Golden Dome interceptors. Meanwhile, Russia is generally considered a world-leading military power in terms of electronic warfare. This combination of hypersonic missiles, drone swarms and signal jamming may make the Golden Dome project technically unfeasible.
American taxpayers should question whether spending trillions on an air defence system that may not even work properly is a prudent investment. A return to sincere diplomacy in support of strategic arms control is likely to prove a more cost-effective approach, and the only viable way to ensure indivisible security for everyone.
• Shubitz is an independent Brics analyst.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.