�We make the greatest missiles. We have the anti-missile missiles that shoot down missiles many, many miles away in the sky, like a needle in a haystack. They shoot them down, hard to believe. And we're surrounding our country with them, by the way, if you don't mind. Remember what other countries said? �We don't want you to put defensive mishes (sic) and missiles in your country.� You don't want us to put -- explain that to me, please. Remember? They used to get angry when we would put defensive missiles, anti-missile missiles in our country. And so we wouldn't do it. No thanks. We'll put them in, if you don't mind. �
Donald Trump, 02 August 2018
Ballistic Missile Defense
In trademark Trumpian rhetorical style, the promise to build an Iron Dome for America is not a literal promise to build a replica of the Israeli system, which doesn�t seem financially or logistically feasible for a nation as big as the United States. Threat Status National Security Correspondent Ben Wolfgang offers a closer look, reporting that Trump�s pledge is actually about constructing a cutting-edge missile defense shield that costs tens � not hundreds � of billions of dollars, using space-based interceptors and other 21st-century tools that can fend off adversary attacks. Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry �Trey� Obering III, a former director of the federal Missile Defense Agency, tells Threat Status that �we�ve got to be able to destroy anything and everything that North Korea or Iran could throw at us. And we�ve got to be able to destroy anything that Russia or China could throw at us � and have enough capacity to ensure deterrence.�
Incoming White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz said the �Iron Dome for America� must be able to take down unmanned aircraft. �We need to take a hard look at our homeland defenses. President Trump has talked about an Iron Dome for America. That needs to include drones as well, not just adversarial actions like hypersonic missiles. We need to have an all-of-the-above protection of U.S. airspace,� he told CBS�s �Face the Nation� program in December 2024.
Riki Ellison, head of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, wrote "Our nuclear deterrence policy is great against countries that got nuclear weapons and are threatening to use nuclear weapons. But it has failed now. Over the last couple of years, we've seen this in all the theaters around the world. And we certainly have seen this in the United States, with Chinese balloons, with Chinese drones, hundreds of them in Langley Air Force Base, with thousands of drones and stuff coming across the Mexican border, with air infractions on our air with Russia-Chinese planes. So the threat is here. And it's even greater than that." On 27 February 2025 Trump issued an executive order "The Iron Dome for America" which stated "The threat of attack by ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missiles, and other advanced aerial attacks, remains the most catastrophic threat facing the United States. President Ronald Reagan endeavored to build an effective defense against nuclear attacks, and while this program resulted in many technological advances, it was canceled before its goal could be realized. And since the United States withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 and initiated development of limited homeland missile defense, official United States homeland missile defense policy has remained only to stay ahead of rogue-nation threats and accidental or unauthorized missile launches. Over the past 40 years, rather than lessening, the threat from next-generation strategic weapons has become more intense and complex with the development by peer and near-peer adversaries of next-generation delivery systems and their own homeland integrated air and missile defense capabilities. Sec. 2. Policy. To further the goal of peace through strength, it is the policy of the United States that: (a) The United States will provide for the common defense of its citizens and the Nation by deploying and maintaining a next-generation missile defense shield; (b) The United States will deter � and defend its citizens and critical infrastructure against � any foreign aerial attack on the Homeland; and (c) The United States will guarantee its secure second-strike capability. Sec. 3. Implementation. Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Defense shall: (a) Submit to the President a reference architecture, capabilities-based requirements, and an implementation plan for the next-generation missile defense shield. The architecture shall include, at a minimum, plans for: (i) Defense of the United States against ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles, and other next-generation aerial attacks from peer, near-peer, and rogue adversaries; (ii) Acceleration of the deployment of the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor layer; (iii) Development and deployment of proliferated space-based interceptors capable of boost-phase intercept; (iv) Deployment of underlayer and terminal-phase intercept capabilities postured to defeat a countervalue attack; (v) Development and deployment of a custody layer of the Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture; (vi) Development and deployment of capabilities to defeat missile attacks prior to launch and in the boost phase; (vii) Development and deployment of a secure supply chain for all components with next-generation security and resilience features; and (viii) Development and deployment of non-kinetic capabilities to augment the kinetic defeat of ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles, and other next-generation aerial attacks; (b) Review relevant authorities and organization of the Department of Defense to develop and deploy capabilities at the necessary speed to implement this directive; (c) Jointly with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, submit to the President a plan to fund this directive, allowing sufficient time for consideration by the President before finalization of the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget; and (d) In cooperation with United States Strategic Command and United States Northern Command, submit to the President: (i) An updated assessment of the strategic missile threat to the Homeland; and (ii) A prioritized set of locations to progressively defend against a countervalue attack by nuclear adversaries. Sec. 4. Allied and Theater Missile Defense Review. The United States continues to cooperate on missile defense with its allies and partners to aid in the defense of ally populations and troops and of forward-deployed United States troops. Following the submission to the President of the next-generation missile defense reference architecture under section 3(a) of this order, the Secretary of Defense shall direct a review of theater missile defense posture and initiatives to identify ways in which the United States and its allies and partners can: (a) Increase bilateral and multilateral cooperation on missile defense technology development, capabilities, and operations; (b) Improve theater missile defenses of forward-deployed United States troops and allied territories, troops, and populations; and (c) Increase and accelerate the provision of United States missile defense capabilities to allies and partners." Analysts assumed this would include national-level systems (the Ground-based Midcourse Defense System) and theater-level systems (AEGIS Ashore and THAAD). It will also expand the Space Development Agency's Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture, which includes constellations of small sats for missile detection and tracking. The EO does not name specific capabilities by program name (except one noted below). We see this as very positive for a number of existing programs. We believe the following programs could be included in IDFA. We note this is an illustrative list that will be defined when the budget is released. Lockheed Martin: NGI, THAAD, PAC-3 MSE, AEGIS Ashore, LRDR, BMC4I Northrop Grumman: GBI, GPI, HBTSS (named in EO) RTX: GBI, THAAD (sensor), Standard Missile family L3Harris: HBTSS and SDA PWSA
The Director of the Missile Defense Agency, Air Force Lt. General Samuel Greaves, stated 09 August 2017 that he had �very, very high confidence that the currently deployed ballistic missile defense system meets today�s threat, and we�ve demonstrated that capability through testing... These tests are not staged. They�re not crafted for success. They stress the systems. We learn from every single test. I believe deep down in my heart the nation should be very confident that we have demonstrated the ability to defend against the range of threats that we are seeing today.... The threat continues to vote and it�s our responsibility to ensure we can deploy systems to defend the nation and stay ahead of that threat�.
NATO�s assurances that the European missile defense system will not be directed at Russia are worthless, Russian experts argue, so long as an agreement limiting the activities of missile defense systems to the borders of NATO member countries � and not an inch further � is not reached. Otherwise, the Russias say they will be forced to take asymmetrical (but highly effective) measure to neutralize this missile defense system.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
