Trump 'Golden Dome' plan tricky and expensive: experts

Trump announced plans for the space-based system last month, saying it would eventually cost around $175 billion and would be operational by the end of his term in 2029.
The planned defence shield's name is a nod to Israel's Iron Dome that has intercepted thousands of short-range rockets since 2011.
But the US defence system would intercept much bigger intercontinental threats.
The plan comes after a 2022 Department of defence study pointed to advances by China and Russia.
Beijing is closing the gap with Washington when it comes to ballistic and hypersonic missile technology, while Moscow is modernising its intercontinental-range missile systems and developing advanced precision strike missiles, it said.
Trump has claimed the "Golden Dome" will be "capable of intercepting missiles even if they are launched from other sides of the world".
But analysts are sceptical.
"I'm not holding my breath," said Thomas Withington, an associate fellow at the RUSI defence think tank.
"The challenges are so significant at this stage that they may simply be unrealistic to surround in the timeframes that the Trump administration envisages."
'Poster child for waste'
Thomas Roberts, of the Georgia Institute of Technology, said the "Golden Dome" plan was based on being able to detect when a long-range missile was fired.
A missile's so-called "boost phase" -- which produces a heat blast that lasts one to two minutes and can be observed from space -- is the best time to deploy defences, he said.
"If you had an enormous constellation of interceptors in orbit at all times, they could be readily de-orbited -- or systematically removed from orbit -- to strike an intercontinental ballistic missile," he said.
But Todd Harrison, from the American Enterprise Institute, said this would require a massive number of satellites.
"It takes about 950 interceptors spread out in orbit around the Earth to ensure that at least one is always in range to intercept a missile during its boost phase," he said.
But that means that if an adversary launches a salvo of ten missiles, some 9,500 interceptors would be needed to ensure at least ten are within range.
"Given that China has about 350 intercontinental ballistic missiles and Russia has 306 -- not including their sub-launched ballistic missiles -- scaling a space-based interceptor system to meet the threat quickly becomes impractical."
The non-partisan US Congressional Budget Office estimates that, just to stop "one or two intercontinental ballistic missiles", the United States would need a constellation of satellites costing between $161 billion to $542 billion.
The US military could spend billions of dollars on research only for the next administration to nix the project, Harrison warned.
"Golden Dome could become the poster child for waste and inefficiency in defence," he said.
The plan also calls for developing satellites able to fire lasers at missiles to avoid too much debris on impact.
But a European defence contractor said on condition of anonymity that such lasers are "still beyond what even the Americans are capable of doing".
"It's just an excellent way to give the US (defence) industry substantial funding so they can increase their technological lead without necessarily aiming for actual operational deployment," the contractor said.
'Global arms race'?
Trump's plan is reminiscent of President Ronald Reagan ambition for a Strategic Defense Initiative in the 1980s, which also sought to place interceptor satellites in space.
China and Russia, which both have nuclear weapons, have slammed the latest plan as "deeply destabilising".
Nuclear-armed North Korea has called the plan a "very dangerous" threat.
Julia Cournoyer, research associate at Chatham House, said the plan was risky as adversaries would likely see it "as an attempt to undermine the logic of nuclear deterrence".
"If Washington is perceived to be developing a shield that could one day neutralise a retaliatory nuclear strike, it risks triggering a dangerous global arms race," which would exacerbate rather than reduce risk.
Withington said Trump might be hoping to use the plan as leverage for talks with China and Russia.
"It may be that the Trump administration is hoping that this would bring both countries to some kind of negotiating table to talk about a reduction of nuclear warhead sizes or to revitalise the arms control agenda," he said.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

France 24

an hour ago

• France 24

Can NATO keep Trump on-message about Russia threat?

But the loudest voice in the room likely won't be on the same page. Since coming back to office, US President Donald Trump has upended the West's approach towards Russia's war on Ukraine by undercutting Kyiv and opening the door to closer ties with Moscow. While the volatile leader has expressed some frustration with Russia's Vladimir Putin for refusing a ceasefire, he has steered clear of punishing the Kremlin. At a G7 summit this week Trump made waves by saying the group of industrialised countries should never have expelled Russia. Ahead of the Hague gathering, diplomats at NATO have been wrangling over a five-paragraph summit statement, with many countries pressing for a full-throated assertion of the menace from Moscow. That, they say, will help explain the main thrust of the meeting: an agreement for countries to ramp up defence spending to satisfy Trump's demand for it to reach five percent of GDP. Statement on Russia 'threat' Since the Kremlin launched its 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the alliance has called Russia "the most significant and direct threat to allies' security and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area". But this time around the United States -- backed up by Moscow-friendly Hungary and Slovakia -- has been intent on watering that down. Diplomats have been juggling with variants such as referring to "threats, including Russia" or mentioning "the long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security". The verbal nuances may seem slight, but they mean a lot to those countries being asked to massively ramp up spending and those on NATO's eastern flank most threatened by the Kremlin. NATO has warned that Russia could be ready to attack an alliance country within five years. "If we can get Trump to sign off on calling Russia a long-term threat then that would be a good result," a senior European diplomat told AFP. 'Near threat' As US peace efforts between Russia and Ukraine have stalled, the diplomat said that Washington appeared to have "moved a centimetre in our direction" on taking a stronger stance on Russia. "Of course more hawkish countries want to go further -- but just getting Trump to agree that would still be fine," the diplomat said. Part of the US reasoning is that Washington is more worried about the threat China poses worldwide -- and that Russia is more a problem just in Europe. "Russia is the near threat," said US ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker. "But China is obviously a big challenge for all of us, and we need to be allied and address those threats as well." Camille Grand of the European Council on Foreign Relations said that beneath the diplomatic fine-tuning, NATO was being confronted by a "fundamental question". "How does the United States view Russia?" he said. "So far we haven't really got an answer." Even if NATO does opt for stronger wording on Moscow, there is always the possibility that Trump could show up in The Hague and directly contradict it. But the debate could come into sharper focus in the months after the summit when the United States could announce a pull-back of forces in Europe as part of a review of its global deployments. Division on Ukraine One area where Washington appears clearly not on board with most other allies is on backing Ukraine. Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky is set to attend on the sidelines of the summit but his involvement is being kept to a minimum to avoid a bust-up with Trump. Diplomats said there should be a reference in the summit statement linking new defence spending to helping Ukraine -- but there will be no talk of Kyiv's long-term push to join NATO. "The US does not see Ukrainian security as essential to European security," said Kurt Volker, a former US ambassador to NATO.

France 24

2 hours ago

• France 24

Europeans push for renewed diplomacy with Iran as Trump mulls military action

European foreign ministers are set to meet their Iranian counterpart on Friday aiming to create a pathway back to diplomacy over its contested nuclear programme despite the US actively considering joining Israeli strikes against Iran. Ministers from Britain, France and Germany, known as the E3, as well as the European Union's foreign policy chief spoke to Abbas Araqchi earlier this week and have been coordinating with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. In a rare call they pressed upon Araqchi the need to return to the negotiating table and avoid further escalation. At Iran's suggestion the two sides agreed to meet face-to-face. The talks will be held in Geneva, where an initial accord between Iran and world powers to curb its nuclear programme in return for sanctions lifting was struck in 2013 before a comprehensive deal in 2015. They come after negotiations between Iran and the United States collapsed when Israel launched what it called Operation Rising Lion against Iran's nuclear facilities and ballistic capabilities on June 12. 04:47 "The Iranians can't sit down with the Americans whereas we can," said a European diplomat. "We will tell them to come back to the table to discuss the nuclear issue before the worst case scenario, while raising our concerns over its ballistic missiles, support to Russia and detention of our citizens." The European powers, who were not part of Iran's nuclear negotiations with the United States, had grown increasingly frustrated by the US negotiating strategy in the talks. They deemed some of the demands unrealistic, while fearing the possibility of a weak initial political framework that would lead to open-ended negotiations. Two diplomats said there were no great expectations for a breakthrough in Geneva, where the European Union's foreign policy chief will also attend. But they said it was vital to engage with Iran because once the war stopped, Iran's nuclear programme would still remain unresolved given that it would be impossible to eradicate the know-how acquired, leaving it potentially able to clandestinely rebuild its programme. An Iranian official said Tehran has always welcomed diplomacy, but urged the E3 to use all available means to pressure Israel to halt its attacks on Iran. "Iran remains committed to diplomacy as the only path to resolving disputes — but diplomacy is under attack," the official said. 45:34 Prior to Israel's strikes the E3 and US put forward a resolution that was approved by the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN watchdog, which declared Iran in breach of its nuclear non-proliferation obligations. As part of last week's IAEA resolution, European officials had said they could refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council later in the summer to add pressure on Iran if there was no progress in the nuclear talks. That would be separate to them reimposing UN sanctions, known as the snapback mechanism, before October 18 when the 2015 accord expires. The Europeans are the only ones who can launch the snapback mechanism, with diplomats saying the three countries had looked to set a final deadline at the end of August to launch it. "Iran has repeatedly stated that triggering snapback will have serious consequences," the Iranian official said.

France 24

6 hours ago

• France 24

US immigration agents barred from LA baseball stadium: team

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrived at the stadium and "requested permission to access the parking lots," the Dodgers said in a statement. "They were denied entry to the grounds by the organization," the Dodgers said in a statement, adding that the team's game later Thursday would go ahead as scheduled. Images and video shared on social media showed a line of unmarked trucks and masked ICE agents at one Dodger Stadium entrance while protesters chanting "ICE out of LA" gathered nearby. The incident comes against a backdrop of heightened tensions in Los Angeles, which has become ground zero of President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown across the US. The city has seen scattered violence but mostly peaceful protests in recent weeks ignited by an escalation in federal immigration sweeps that have targeted migrant workers in garment factories, car washes and other workplaces. In addition to mobilization of ICE agents, Trump ordered the deployment of thousands of US National Guard troops and hundreds of US Marines into the city in response to the protests -- a move that was opposed by city leaders and California Governor Gavin Newsom. The incident at Dodger Stadium on Thursday comes as the reigning World Series champions have faced criticism for their response to the immigration crackdown. A huge part of the team's fan base is drawn from the Latino community, with some fans claiming a sense of betrayal over the franchise's failure to speak out against the ongoing raids. © 2025 AFP