“It’s a generational investment in America and American safety,” said Defense Secretary Pete Hegses.
NNSA description, latest agency hits on Doge Cuts
The NNSA within the Department of Energy is tasked with ensuring that the country’s nuclear weapons are safe and secure, but not safe from Doge Cuts.
- Trump and Heggs announced their initial funding request for the Golden Dome Missile Defense Program and tapped Space Force Generals to lead the initiative.
- Missile defense experts argue that strategic defense helps prevent wars, but military control advocates have long detained them by inspiring deadly nuclear weapons designed to defeat them instead.
Washington – Cruise missile. Ballistic missile. Hemp-term missile. Drone. Everything could be nukes in US soil.
President Donald Trump’s vision for the security of his US homeland from such threats moved forward when he and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegses announced a $25 billion initial investment in the “Golden Dome” protecting Americans. The president also said in 2029 that the system should “be fully operational before my term ends.”
“It’s a generational investment in America and American safety,” Heggs said.
The Golden Dome Project aims to cover the country with three levels of air defense, according to Senate testimony by Northern Command Leader General Gregory Gillott. Sensors will target incoming ballistic missiles, as military sees incoming threats, ground-based interceptor missiles, and future systems, with additional systems responding to low altitude threats such as high-sonic missiles and enemy drones.
The funding is included as part of a tax cut megaville recruited by Trump, which is currently working through Congress, the president said.
Trump and Hegses tapped Space Force General Michael Guetrein to lead the Golden Dome effort, as Politico first reported. In his remarks to reporters, Gutrain described the project as a “bold and offensive” counter to aggravating threats from enemies such as Russia and China.
Military authorities, experts and intelligence agency warn that their US homeland is vulnerable to strategic attacks. However, many of the Golden Dome prediction features remain in the drawings, and its cost depends on the desired scale.
Trump said the system would cost $175 billion, but details of the estimate remain unknown, including representing an increase in technology research for future generations, as opposed to an expansion of existing technologies. It is also unclear how effective a system that relies solely on existing technologies would be to counter mass nuclear attacks from Russia or China.
A May 5 report from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that deploying and operating bare bone-based capabilities to intercept one or two incoming ballistic missiles would cost at least $161 billion over 20 years. (CBO officials said in the report they are still calculating the estimated operating costs for the broader features required by the Golden Dome.)
The plan is not without skeptics.
I-Maine Sen. Angus King sued the military missile defense secretary at a May 13 Congressional hearing, asking whether “there can be denied a substantial missile attack from Russia or China.” In recent years, the military has invested in the US territory of the Western Pacific, Guam, where nearly 170,000 people live, in the approximately $8 billion missile defense.
“If you’re talking about providing the level of defence you have in Guam for the citizens of the (mainland), we’re talking about awful lot of money,” King said. He questioned whether instead, he should invest more in the push to modernize the country’s nuclear weapons.
“I’m everything about protecting my hometown. It’s just a matter of how much it costs compared to other defensive needs,” the senator added. He argued that if the directed energy beam technology currently under development is realized, it would present the best long-term solution to cost issues.
Arms control advocates have traditionally argued that increasing missile defenses will reduce world stability, as they encourage the enemy to develop new offensive weapons that can defeat such defenses. During the Cold War, Soviet officials feared that US missile defense efforts were intended to allow America to launch a surprising nuclear attack without fear of retaliation.
However, some missile defense experts, including Tom Caraco of the Center for Strategic and International Research, have argued that recent conflicts indicate a shift in the paradigm for the use of nuclear-free missiles against strategic targets behind the frontline.
Karako said Israel’s massive multinational defense from the Iranian ballistic missile attack in April 2023 “stopping the war” and provided examples.
“If most of these 550 or more projectiles reached Israel… there would have been a massive retaliation,” Karako said, arguing that the episode is “a case study of how… a rather effective air and missile defense contributes to strategic stability.”
According to Karako, space is part of today’s battlefield, and it framing missile defense issues as strictly one of nuclear attack prevention is outdated.
“The 1980s were called and they wanted to control their weapons and regain the disarmament debate,” he said. “Today we are facing a very different situation.”
If you have any news tips to share about Golden Dome or other nuclear issues, contact us via Davis Winkie at dwinkie@usatoday.com or the signal-encrypted messaging app at 770-539-3257. Davis Winkie’s role in covering nuclear threats and national security at USA Today is supported by partnership with Autorider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partner. Funders do not provide editor input.
