US President Donald Trump’s proposed Golden Dome missile defence system marks a dramatic return to a Cold War-era vision of space-based weaponry. With a projected cost of $175 billion—though some estimates suggest it could exceed $500 billion—the system aims to shield the US from next-generation missile threats using a vast satellite and interceptor network in Earth’s orbit.
Modelled after Israel’s Iron Dome, but exponentially larger, Golden Dome draws heavily from Ronald Reagan’s defunct Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), famously dubbed “Star Wars.” Like SDI, it proposes to station interceptors in space to shoot down nuclear and conventional missiles during their boost or cruise phases. Unlike its predecessor, Golden Dome comes with a tight timeline—Trump claims it will be operational before the end of his current term.
Technological Hurdles and Budget Doubts
Despite bold claims, experts remain skeptical about the feasibility of such a massive project. Alistair Edgar, a political science professor, said the idea depends on technology that largely does not yet exist. The Congressional Budget Office estimates it could take up to 20 years and over $1 trillion to fully develop. Former Canadian defence minister Peter MacKay called the plan “futuristic” and “massively expensive.”
Read More: The Judge Cannot Erase His Shame
Experts point to the need for bipartisan support to maintain momentum across presidential terms, a historically difficult challenge for long-term defence projects. The proposal’s initial $25 billion has been allocated, but much more funding will be needed in the years to come.
Militarization of Space
Golden Dome has sparked strong warnings from space and defence analysts about accelerating the militarization of space. Victoria Samson of the Secure World Foundation warned that the system opens a “Pandora’s box,” potentially prompting other nations to launch their own space weapons or anti-satellite systems. Already, Russia, China, and India have demonstrated anti-satellite capabilities.
Critics argue that such a project undermines existing norms against weaponizing space, increases strategic instability, and could render the doctrine of mutually assured destruction obsolete. China and Russia have both voiced “serious concerns,” urging Washington to abandon the plan. Moscow hinted that it could force renewed nuclear arms control talks, while Beijing warned of a heightened space arms race.
Read More: Is Pakistan Really Behind Terror in India—Or Just a Convenient Villain?
Canada has shown interest in joining the project, with Prime Minister Mark Carney confirming discussions with US officials. Participation could offer strategic advantages and potential economic benefits through involvement in cutting-edge research and development. However, experts caution that Canada may be relegated to a junior role with limited decision-making influence. Beth Fischer of the University of Toronto noted that countries involved in Reagan’s SDI saw little technological or diplomatic payoff. Canada, which opted out of SDI in the 1980s, may face a similar dilemma again.