Trump's $175 Billion Fantasy: Will the 'Golden Dome' Really Protect America—or Bankrupt It

On May 20, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump officially unveiled a new ambitious initiative dubbed the “Golden Dome”—a multilayered missile defense system designed to counter a wide range of aerial threats, including ballistic, cruise, hypersonic, and space-launched missiles. With an initial budget of $25 billion and a projected total cost of up to $175 billion by the end of Trump’s term in 2029, the project promises a significant shift in aerial security and the potential to redefine security and diplomatic relations across North America—perhaps even altering the global geopolitical landscape.

The Golden Dome is conceived as a comprehensive missile defense system that integrates advanced technologies to shield the U.S. against a broad spectrum of aerial threats. Unlike existing systems like the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) or the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, which target specific missile types, the Golden Dome aims to provide a robust, multi-tiered defensive shield. Its core components include:

Space-Based Sensors: These provide early warning and missile tracking capabilities to enable rapid response.

Advanced Interceptors: Engineered to neutralize threats at various flight phases—from boost to terminal stage.

Ground-Based Systems: These bolster existing defenses to create a cohesive network.

Cyber and Electronic Warfare Capabilities: Protecting the system from potential disruptions.

The project is being spearheaded by General Michael Guetlein, Deputy Chief of Space Operations in the U.S. Space Force, whose expertise in space-based technologies is considered vital for the project’s success. President Trump has described the Golden Dome as a “cutting-edge system” capable of intercepting missiles launched from anywhere—including space—and emphasized its role in defending the homeland. However, the ambitious 2029 full-operational deadline will require major technological advancements and a massive financial commitment.

One notable aspect of the Golden Dome is Canada’s expressed interest in joining the project, despite recent diplomatic tensions with the U.S. Prime Minister Mark Carney’s office has confirmed ongoing negotiations to explore collaboration, which could potentially strengthen the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and align Canada’s defense capabilities with the U.S. This interest underscores a shared understanding of the importance of aerial security in an era of advanced missile threats.

At the same time, Canada is reassessing its commitment to the F-35 fighter jet program and is considering European alternatives as part of a broader redefinition of its security strategy. This review could impact interoperability with U.S. systems—especially if Canada opts for non-American aircraft, which may complicate joint operations under the Golden Dome. Still, the prospect of missile defense collaboration signals that both nations prioritize shared security interests over bilateral disagreements, potentially strengthening long-term U.S.-Canada relations.

Moreover, the Golden Dome is a cornerstone of the U.S. strategy to counter the growing missile capabilities of China and Russia. According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, China possesses about 400 intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and Russia has 350. Both are developing systems to exploit U.S. defense vulnerabilities. The Golden Dome is intended to confront these threats through advanced space-based technologies and interceptors.

However, the system’s effectiveness is under scrutiny. Russia’s geographical proximity to U.S. borders—especially through the Arctic—means that its missiles could reach American soil within minutes, challenging the system’s ability to offer comprehensive protection. Critics, including Senator Jack Reed, have described the budget as a “blank check” lacking a detailed roadmap and raised concerns about feasibility and unintended costs.
Some analysts argue the Golden Dome may escalate the global arms race, particularly with China, which sees the project as a step toward space militarization and a source of rising global tension.

In conclusion, although the Golden Dome aligns with U.S. policies to contain China and Russia, its effectiveness remains uncertain. Given Russia’s geographic advantage and advanced missile capabilities, this project alone cannot ensure complete security. Critics argue the initiative is more of a PR showpiece than a serious national security strategy, aiming more to project power than to eliminate vulnerabilities.

Nonetheless, the Golden Dome represents a major shift in missile defense thinking—combining space-based and ground-based assets to confront modern threats. Its success will hinge on technological progress, international cooperation, and a sober evaluation of geopolitical risks. As America enters this high-cost endeavor, it must balance ambition with realism to safeguard North America’s future security—while managing the mounting financial burden that falls on U.S. taxpayers.

*Translated by Ashraf Hemmati from the original Persian article written by Mohammad Esmail-Khanian