| Golden Dome | |
|---|---|
 Visualization of a global constellation of space-based interceptors such as that proposed by Golden Dome | |
| Type | Missile defense |
| Place of origin | United States |
| Production history | |
| Unit cost | <$831 billion (CBO estimate) $175 billion (White House estimate) |
| Produced | 2029– (White House estimate) 2035– (CSIS estimate)[1] |
| Specifications | |
Operational range | Global |
Launch platform | Satellites, ground-based |
TheGolden Dome is a proposed multi-layermissile defense system for the United States, intended to detect and destroyballistic,hypersonic, andcruise missiles before they launch or during their flight.
On January 27, 2025, PresidentDonald Trump signed an executive order directing theUnited States Armed Forces to construct the Iron Dome for America—later, Golden Dome—before the end of his term.[2] The initial name alluded to Israel's short-rangeIron Dome system,[3] but the Golden Dome would encompass the entire Earth, more like theStrategic Defense Initiative proposed by PresidentRonald Reagan in 1983.[4][5][6][7]
The system would employ aconstellation of thousands of satellites equipped with sensors and interceptors that would be the first U.S.space weapons in orbit.[8][9] Data centers in space would provide automatedcommand and control through a cross-domainartificial intelligence-enabled network.[10][11] Interceptors would fly in rapid orbit just outside the atmosphere, with only a small fraction available at the right time and place to act on any given threat—a flaw that critics argue makes the concept less efficient than traditional regional missile defenses such asIron Dome.[12][13] In 2019, Donald Trump said the satellites would also carry offensive weapons.[14][15]
Cost estimates for the Golden Dome program range from $175 billion (White House), to $831 billion (Congressional Budget Office), to $3.6 trillion (American Enterprise Institute) depending on the architectural details. The wide range largely hinges on the number of space-based missiles and the cost of replacing satellites whose low orbitsdecay quickly due to atmospheric drag.[16][17][18] Some $24.4 billion in federal funding was directed to Golden Dome in theOne Big Beautiful Bill Act in 2025, with another $13 billion allocated for FY2026, totaling 2.2% of thefederal discretionary budget during that year.[19][20]
As of December 2025, the U.S. government has not publicly announced any contract awards for Golden Dome, though theWall Street Journal has reported thatSpaceX is "set to receive" a $2 billion contract to build a 600-satellite constellation for missile targeting.[21][22] This came afterElon Musk's earlier denials of involvement, saying he was focused on Mars.[23] Much smaller contracts for space-based interceptors were reportedly awarded "in secret" in late November.[24] Awardees includeAnduril Industries,Lockheed Martin,Northrop Grumman, and True Anomaly (a firm backed byJD Vance venture capital).[25][26] In December, more than 1,000 "qualifying offerors" were deemed eligible for future awards.[27][28]
Influenced by strategic analyses such as the 1976Team B report—which argued U.S. intelligence had vastly underestimated Soviet threats—and ideas of theCitizens' Advisory Council on National Space Policy, President Ronald Reagan announced theStrategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in 1983.[29] It proposed a space-based global missile defense constellation intended to render nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete." The program immediately faced challenges, with concerns by Congress, including prominent SenatorsSam Nunn andJoe Biden, over its apparent violation of theAnti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, questionable technical feasibility, spiraling launch costs, poor cost-exchange ratio, and destabilizing impact onarms control. By the 1990s, SDI was formally restructured into theBallistic Missile Defense Organization, pivoting from space-based platforms to more proven ground- and sea-based systems.[30]
U.S. missile defense policy continued to evolve, with the 1999 National Missile Defense Act mandating a system to defend against limited ballistic missile attacks. Following a laterTeam B report's recommendation,[31][32] PresidentGeorge W. Bush withdrew the U.S. from the ABM Treaty in 2001.[33] TheObama administration's 2010 Review shifted focus from a homeland-centered shield to more flexible and cooperative regional defenses, limiting the space component to sensing and tracking.[34] This was adjusted by the Trump administration's 2019 Review, expanding scope from rogue states such as North Korea, to include advanced hypersonic threats from "competitors" like Russia and China.[35][36] By contrast, theBiden administration's 2022 Review, while prioritizingGround-based Midcourse Defense, emphasized that it is "neither intended nor capable of defeating" peer-level threats from Russia or China, noting "the interrelationship between strategic offensive arms and strategic defensive systems."[37]
While terrestrial defenses developed, the vision of a full space-based shield remained a consistent goal for its proponents. The modern groundwork for Golden Dome was laid in 2017 by the SDI's former Deputy of Technology, and prominent Team B leader,[32]Michael D. Griffin, who formed theSpace Development Agency during thefirst Trump administration.[38] Griffin long advocated forreusable launch vehicles to make the mass launching of weapons into space economically feasible. While the original Strategic Defense Initiative's attempts at this were short-lived, with theDC-X failing after a series of test flights, Griffin later encouraged and promoted funding of commercial reusable launch vehicles, which have since proven successful.[39][40]
TheHeritage Foundation'sProject 2025 effort advocated for a Golden Dome-like effort, writing thatSpaceX's development ofStarlink proves the feasibility of a space-based "overlayer" of thousands of networked satellites and interceptors[41], broadly similar to theBrilliant Pebbles concept of the 1980s[42][43]. During his2024 presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly mentioned the missile shield concept, often to mixed reception.[44]
In May 2025, four months after the beginning ofTrump's second presidency, 42 members ofUS Congress formally asked theDoD Inspector General to reviewElon Musk’s involvement in Golden Dome.[45] They cited concerns over deviations from standard acquisition processes and a dome subscription model that could "give Musk undue influence over national security." Another key conflict of interest involves four-star generalTerrence J. O'Shaughnessy, former head of U.S. homeland missile defense, who now reports directly to Musk at SpaceX.[46]Michael D. Griffin, founder of theSpace Development Agency behind Golden Dome, has also faced scrutiny.[47] After traveling to Russia with a young Musk in 2001 to studyICBMs, Griffin steered $2 billion inNASA contracts to Musk's newfound space company.[40] SpaceX has since secured missile-tracking satellite contracts through Griffin's SDA as part of itsStarshield program. Griffin also serves as an advisor to Castelion, a startup founded by former SpaceX executives that seeks to mass-produce hypersonic weapons.[48][49]
In April 2025 theDirector, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) determined that Golden Dome fell under its oversight, as they are required by law to analyze testing plans for defense programs with procurements above $3 billion. Days later, Elon Musk'sDepartment of Government Efficiency (DOGE) investigated the office and slashed its resources. A defense official toldCNN that they believed DOGE wanted to prevent DOT&E conducting independent oversight of Golden Dome.[50]
On May 20, 2025,U.S. presidentDonald Trump announced plans for a new space-based missile defense system called the "Golden Dome." Intended to shield the United States from long-range and hypersonic missile threats, the system draws inspiration from Israel's Iron Dome but is orders of magnitude broader in scope.[51][52] Technical details and deployment plans were not immediately released.[53][54]
Trump said the project would be completed within three years and cost about $175 billion,[55] a feasibility, timeline, and price estimate that were quickly and widely disputed.[56][57] TheCongressional Budget Office estimated that it could cost between $161 billion and $542 billion over 20 years,[52][58] while Republican senators involved in the program predicted it would ultimately cost "trillions of dollars."[59] Republicans included $25 billion for Golden Dome in their 2025reconciliation spending bill.[60] The fiscal 2026 defense appropriations bill, passed by Congress on February 3, 2026, included $13.4 billion for space and missile defense systems for Golden Dome.[61]
Defense contractorsSpaceX,Palantir,Anduril, andLockheed Martin were reportedly quick to vie for contracts.
The program is run by GeneralMichael A. Guetlein of theU.S. Space Force, who was nominated for the job in June 2025[62], confirmed by the Senate the following month,[63] and assumed the position on July 21, 2025.[64]
The Golden Dome concept reflects a vast increase in U.S. missile-defense goals, from limited protection against "rogue states" to a system intended to defeat larger strikes from peer-level countries.[2][65] Proponents say it would create new levels of deterrence by rendering adversary nuclear arsenals obsolete.[66]
It also represents a shift away frommidcourse defense, which targets missiles outside the atmosphere. The 44 interceptors of theGround-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system cannot reliably distinguish between a warhead and its decoys, which "seriously limits its effectiveness," as a 2025 report by theAmerican Physical Society put it.[67]
Golden Dome proposes to avoid this problem by disabling missiles in theirboost phase, while they are still gaining speed, traveling in a predictable direction, and emitting heat visible to U.S. infrared sensors. Since ground-based boost-phase interception is impractical (interceptors cannot be placed near enough to enemy launch points), Golden Dome proposes to put interceptors inlow Earth orbit, where they can pass within a few hundred miles of any point on the planet.[68] But since satellites in LEO travel quickly across the face of the Earth, it would take a constellation of thousands of interceptor satellites to guarantee that one or two are within striking distance of an enemy launch.[67] "Defending against a salvo of 10 missiles would require a constellation 10 times that size—that is, tens of thousands of satellites. Defending against a full Russian or Chinese attack would require hundreds of thousands of satellites," according toMIT physicistsLisbeth Gronlund and David Wright.[69]
The cost of launching satellites is expected to decrease when the heavy-liftSpaceX Starship launch vehicle enters service.[18] Still, the extreme expense of creating such a constellation—and replacing satellites as their orbits decay—has led the U.S. military to also pursue space-based midcourse options that would require fewer satellites.[70][71] But these would be more expensive and no better than ground-based interceptors at telling decoys from warheads.[69]
Space-based interceptors would be guided by the nascentHypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor system, one of the tracking elements of theSpace Development Agency's (SDA) seven-layer Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture (PWSA).[72][73][74]
Pentagon leaders have said the system could be used to put offensive weapons in space, giving aglobal strike capability that would createoffensive overmatch.[15] Defense SecretaryPete Hegseth has said the U.S. "will be able to strike anywhere, anytime." Satellites might carry thebunker-bustingCommon-Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB),[75][76] which can reportedly fly 1,000 miles to strike within 14 inches of its target.[77] The missile was designed to fit the HIMARS ground launcher, so several can be compactly racked in a satellite payload bays.[78][79][80]
Theexecutive order called for several design objectives for the dome to include plans for at least eight components:[78]
Marion Messmer, a senior research fellow at London-basedChatham House, said that the Golden Dome's challenges were much greater than the ones thatIsrael's Iron Dome had to face as it had a much larger territory[81] to cover and more types of missiles it had to defeat. Shashank Joshi, defense editor atThe Economist, said while the US military would take the plan very seriously, it was unrealistic to think the system would be completed during Trump's term, and that its cost would take up a large part of the defense budget.[82] Patrycja Bazylczyk, a missile defense expert at the CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies), said that the Golden Dome signaled a reorientation of US missile defense policy towards counteringRussia and China, versus existing systems geared towardsNorth Korea.[83] TheArms Control Association has noted that thePutin regime has been working to ensure it can overcome the threat of a future U.S. space-based interceptor network by developinganti-satellite weapons, undersea torpedoes,hypersonic glide vehicles, and nuclear-powered cruise missiles.Beijing, meanwhile, may respond by increasing its nuclear-armed ballistic missile force.[84] Before the announcement, China'smilitary nuclear arsenal stood at about1/6 the size of the United States. Analysts warn that Golden Dome's pursuit of total immunity could underminestrategic stability, transforming the modern focus on maintaining reliable retaliation into a race to develop new and unpredictable first-strike options.[68]
A study by Todd Harrison of theAmerican Enterprise Institute estimated that the cost of developing and operating the Golden Dome until 2045 could range from $252 billion to $3.6 trillion, depending on how expansive the system is.[85] Advocates of Golden Dome describe a national missile defense shield as "a strategic imperative."[86] In November 2025,United States Strategic Command nominee Richard Correll testified that Golden Dome was key to ensure U.S. nuclearsecond strike capability.[87] Critics suggest the costs for these capabilities have been underestimated, creating a "multi-trillion-dollar gap between rhetoric and reality."[17]
Article I of theOuter Space Treaty states that space is "the province of all mankind" and forbids placing weapons of mass destruction in orbit. Some permanent members of theUnited Nations Security Council have expressed objections to the Golden Dome program, citing inconsistencies with this principle. The program's use of space for attacking targets on the ground ("left of launch" preemptive strike capabilities)[79] has led to discussion over the legality under international law.[88][79][89][90][91][92]
Some analysts argue the integration of such offensive payloads into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) introduces a severe economic and strategic instability driven by the harsh environmental constraints of the domain. LEO satellites function as "perishable munitions" due to rapid orbital decay, creating a “sunk cost trap” for high-value assets like the C-HGB, which has a procurement cost of approximately $41 million per unit according to theCongressional Budget Office.[75] Unlike terrestrial silos that maintain value for decades, the imminent expiration of orbital weapons creates a fiscal “use it or lose it" pressure, potentially incentivizing commanders to expend these assets in gray zone conflicts rather than allowing billions of dollars of hardware to burn up in the atmosphere. Ultimately, the deployment of such systems creates a state of "orbital ambiguity" that destabilizes traditional deterrence. Because a Starshield satellite carrying defensive interceptors is indistinguishable on radar from a commercialStarlink satellite or one carrying offensive hypersonic gliders, adversaries are forced to treat the entire constellation as a potential nuclear-equivalent first-strike platform. Strategic theorists such as Forrest Morgan (RAND) and James Acton (Carnegie Endowment) argue that this "warhead ambiguity" creates a “reciprocal fear of surprise attack," incentivizing adversaries to execute massive "blinding" strikes against the constellation or its launch infrastructure at the onset of any crisis, thereby ensuring that a limited conflict immediately escalates to the strategic level.[93][94][95]
On January 14, 2026, President Trump claimed it was vital that the United States take control ofGreenland to be able to construct the Golden Dome.[96] In early 2025, theGovernment Accountability Office warned that the constellation of satellites being built for Golden Dome, including SDA's PWSA andSpaceX Starshield satellites, have not been able to demonstrate reliable links between satellites in differentorbital planes due to high relative motion.[97] Defense analysts note thatPituffik Space Base serves as a critical ground station bridge, being one of the few defensible places on Earth that can directly communicate with all planes in the constellation. While the U.S. already operates from Pituffik with Denmark’s consent, some analysts argue sovereignty would eliminate political constraints and ensure uninterrupted control over assets critical to Golden Dome.[98][99]
Pituffik is uniquely suited for these optical (laser) downlinks because it sits in apolar desert, offering exceptionally low precipitable water vapor. This creates an atmospheric window for reliableV-band and laser transmission, which are otherwise attenuated by moisture in temperate zones—thereby enabling the massive data backhaul required to "close the kill chain" for Golden Dome's hypersonic interceptors.[100] A 2025USNORTHCOM modernization study consequently prioritized a new Network Operations Center at Pituffik to handle this throughput.[101][102] Complicating U.S. dominance, theEuropean Space Agency (ESA) began construction of its own optical ground station in Greenland in late 2025, creating a rival infrastructure capable of terabyte-speed data transfer that bypasses U.S. networks.[100] Finally, the site is logistically essential for the Golden Dome's low-orbit interceptors that suffer high atmospheric drag and require continuous replenishment.[103] Some strategic analyses speculate that Arctic basing could, in theory, support higher-latitude launch and tracking operations, though no such launch infrastructure currently exists in Greenland.[104]
Interest in Greenland'srare-earth elements has centered on the Tanbreez deposit, a geological formation whose specific mineral composition—Tantalum, Niobium, Rare Earths, and Zirconium—provides a single-source supply chain for the Golden Dome's hypersonic capabilities.[105] Defense analysts note that the deposit is uniquely rich in bothZirconium and heavy rare earths likeSamarium andYttrium, the essential precursors forZirconium Diboride (ZrB2) ultra-high temperature ceramics. These materials are required to manufacture thermal protection systems that allow hypersonic glide weapons to survive atmospheric re-entry temperatures without ablating.[106][107][108] Forbes reported in January 2026 how billionaires includingJeff Bezos,Bill Gates, andPeter Thiel have accelerated investments in Greenlandic ventures likeKoBold Metals andPraxis, effectively betting that security mandates will override local environmental barriers to extraction.[109]
Canada: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations compared U.S. President Donald Trump's Golden Dome to aprotection racket after Trump said America's northern neighbor must either pay $61 billion to join the program or couldagree to annexation (in which case inclusion would be free). AmbassadorBob Rae also noted that "threats to sovereign integrity are prohibited" under theCharter of the United Nations.[110] Earlier, CanadianMinister of National DefenceBill Blair had expressed a willingness for participation in the Golden Dome project.[111][112][113][114][115][116]
China: On 21 May 2025, Foreign Ministry spokespersonMao Ning criticized the Golden Dome plan, claiming it "violates the principle of peaceful use of space in theOuter Space Treaty". She called on the US to "give up developing and deploying [a] global anti-missile system", which risked "turning space into a war zone".[89][90] In a white paper published by theState Council Information Office in November 2025, China criticized the move towards "absolute security" and that it would "pose a serious threat to outer space security".[117]
New Zealand: New Zealand Defence MinisterJudith Collins expressed support for the Golden Dome missile system, saying "I don't see it as an attack mechanism. It's a defence mechanism. And if people did not feel they needed to defend themselves, they wouldn't waste the money on it." Trump had earlier noted the space-based system would be "a very big part of our defense and, obviously, of our offense" and capable of striking foreign assets even before they launch.[15] The New Zealand-founded andCalifornia-basedRocket Lab had recently acquired the Arizona company Geost, which is involved in the Golden Dome project.[118]
Russia: Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswomanMaria Zakharova said "the United States' Golden Dome project undermines the foundations of strategic stability as it involves the creation of a global missile defense system."[119] On 8 May 2025, China and Russia made a joint statement criticizing the proposal's rejection of the "inseparable interrelationship between strategic offensive arms and strategic defensive arms", its "left-of-launch" capabilities, and its "orbital deployment of interception systems".[120] On 21 May 2025, Press SecretaryDmitry Peskov instead stated that the plan was a "sovereign matter" for the US, and that the legal framework of defunct US-Russia nuclear arms treaties "must be recreated both in the interests of our two countries and in the interests of security throughout the planet".[121]
North Korea: On 27 May 2025, North Korea'sMinistry of Foreign Affairs criticized the proposal as representing "an outer space nuclear war scenario". It denounced "undisguised moves forspace militarization" and argued regional stability requires "the symmetry of the matchless power".[122]{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)