Fabian Hoffmann
This week, U.S. President Donald Trump outlined his plans for the United States’ “Golden Dome” missile defense project. The name is modeled after Israel’s “Iron Dome” missile defense system, which protects Israeli territory against short-range rockets and projectiles, including mortar and artillery rounds.
In contrast to Iron Dome, however, the President Trump’s demands for the program are much more ambitious, aiming to defend the continental United States from a divdrse range of missile threats, including hypersonic missile systems, cruise missiles, and nuclear-armed ballistic missiles.
According to the plan, the U.S. Congress is being asked to provide an initial “down payment” of $25 billion, followed by an additional $175 billion over the next three years. Trump stated that the project would be completed within his current term and claimed it would protect the U.S. homeland with a success rate “very close to 100 percent.”
This post analyzes the Golden Dome project, including its technical feasibility, economic rationale, and potential political ramifications. In short, if Golden Dome focuses on defending the United States against cruise missiles, short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, and long-range drones, it stands a good chance of meaningfully contributing to U.S. defense and deterrence, potentially even within a relatively short timeframe. However, if the focus shifts toward deploying a space-based strategic missile defense system, as strongly implied by Trump in recent media appearances, the costs are likely to outweigh the benefits.
No comments:
Post a Comment