Years ago, I witnessed the early development of a software that could possibly evolve into a part of Israel’s Iron Dome technology. As coordinates were swiftly inputted into the computer, a massive screen displayed a map of Israel, simulating a hypothetical conflict where missile strikes escalated rapidly, culminating in a blinding flash before the screen momentarily went dark and then restarted, leaving a sense of unease lingering.
In the initial days of his second term, Donald Trump signed an executive order ambitiously directing the initiation of a missile defense system construction project named “Golden Dome for America.” The next-generation missile defense system will be based on Israel’s “Iron Dome.”
Initially, President Trump wanted to name it “American Iron Dome,” but later changed it to “Golden Dome for America.” Defense News speculated that this change might be related to trademark issues, as “Iron Dome” is a registered trademark of Israel’s defense company Rafael Advanced Defense Systems. Additionally, the Trump administration may also wish to clearly indicate that the U.S. will not adopt Israel’s “Iron Dome” system. However, the concept is similar.
Furthermore, the name aligns well with Trump’s penchant for the opulent and grandeur – think of the décor style of Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago, or the $100,000 watch he marketed in 2024. Recently, we witnessed the Oval Office in the White House undergoing a gold-plated renovation to celebrate America’s “Golden Age.”
Thus, the aptly named “Golden Dome” project has become one of the government’s top priorities in national defense, promising to reshape America’s homeland security. But is it truly feasible?
The defense systems of the U.S. and Israel differ, with the latter needing to defend a territory roughly the size of New Jersey, while the “Golden Dome” system would have to safeguard the vast 3.8 million square miles of U.S. territory – a significant difference that has evoked both supporters’ enthusiasm and opponents’ skepticism.
Skepticism is understandable. In addition to logistical support, we must not forget that America’s national security has fallen far behind but is catching up.
Last year in December, Adam Kredo published an article on the Washington Free Beacon outlining simulations by the congressional “China Task Force” exploring scenarios to protect Taiwan from intrusion by the Chinese navy.
In 25 identical simulations, the consistent results revealed significant shortfalls: the U.S. lacked sufficient weapons to sustain a conflict with China. Critical weapons stockpiles, such as anti-ship missiles, would be depleted in three to seven days; long-range cruise missiles in a month; and Taiwan’s missile reserves in a week. The replenishment of ammunition would be excruciatingly slow: basic ammunition would take two years, submarines 8 years, and aircraft carriers 40 years.
Former National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan admitted in early December that a war with China would swiftly deplete America’s ammunition reserves, but during his four-year tenure, he did not propose any solutions. The disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan left billions of dollars in equipment, clearly showing that the previous administration failed to learn from it.
All this raises a question: “If we lack sufficient ground weaponry, is it wise to prioritize investment in the air force?”
The core purpose of the “Golden Dome” is to counter various missile threats like ballistic missiles, hypersonic missiles, and advanced cruise missiles. Trump’s executive order mandates the establishment of a multi-layered missile defense system utilizing cutting-edge technologies such as space-based sensors, interceptors, high-energy lasers, and microwaves.
Over 360 defense contractors, including giants like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, RTX, and Northrop Grumman, have submitted proposals, hoping to participate in a project matching the scale and cost of the “Manhattan Project.”
The Space Force, Missile Defense Agency, and even North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) are collaborating on designing an integrated system incorporating satellites, ground radars, and airborne assets, capable of “taking down enemy bombers launching missiles towards America before they reach.” Essentially, “Golden Dome” could be an effort of the “whole of government” to integrate electronic warfare and counter-UAV systems, thereby constructing an unparalleled, comprehensive threat defense network. It sounds great, but can we also focus on building our ground assets while constructing this system?
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Procurement and Sustainment, Steven J. Morani, is dedicated to achieving this goal. Morani mentioned to the Defense Department news that they are advancing the “Golden Dome” project while realigning it to meet Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s priorities, including revitalizing combat readiness, developing capabilities commensurate with threats, rebuilding the U.S. military, and re-establishing deterrents to defend the homeland.
He also stated that they are “determining how to allocate personnel, resources, and priorities to better directly support warfighters.” For this, he said they are “seeking ways to simplify processes, eliminate some red tape… including reviewing the Department of Defense’s real estate asset portfolio to reduce or eliminate unnecessary parts.”
Considering this, it’s evident that the government’s efficacy in cost-cutting efforts will play a significant role in recovering wasted funds that could be better utilized for safeguarding the nation’s security. It’s important to note that since February 2022 alone, the U.S. has allocated $182.8 billion to Ukraine, funds that could have been better spent on its own defense infrastructure.
Clearly, we should have initiated a comprehensive air defense system long ago, especially considering that the “Iron Dome” system established with U.S. support by Israel has been operational for 14 years.
Author’s Bio:
Susan D. Harris is a conservative writer and journalist. Her website is SusanDHarris.com.