President Trump has issued an executive order to develop a next-generation missile defense system, drawing comparisons to Israel’s Iron Dome, which he described as a response to what he considers the most significant threat to the United States: ballistic missiles and advanced aerial weapons.
Experts have raised concerns about the feasibility of implementing an Iron Dome-style system in the United States due to its vast size, which is over 400 times that of Israel. The order, titled “Iron Dome for America,” mandates the Pentagon to provide a detailed plan within 60 days, focusing on the accelerated development of U.S. hypersonic missiles and space-based interceptors.
Both Mr. Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth emphasized that the new system represents a substantial enhancement of the United States’ air defense capabilities. The initiative aims to build upon decades of U.S. defense efforts and echoes former President Ronald Reagan’s vision from the 1980s, which involved significant investment in defense against potential nuclear threats—a program known as “Star Wars” that ultimately did not succeed.
Supporters of the initiative cite recent global events, such as Russia's deployment of hypersonic missiles in Ukraine and missile attacks on Israel from Iran and Hezbollah, as justifications for expanding U.S. missile defense. Israel’s Iron Dome, developed by Rafael, has successfully intercepted numerous incoming threats.
However, experts caution that creating a comprehensive missile defense system for the United States poses technical challenges that are far greater than those faced by Israel. They argue that missile defense is generally more effective for smaller nations, and the financial implications of developing such a system for the U.S. could be overwhelming.
Sidharth Kaushal, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, suggested that pursuing a nationwide missile defense system could potentially “bankrupt the nation.” He noted that the executive order is somewhat ambiguous, leaving room for either a full-scale development effort or a more gradual increase in funding for existing programs.
The order does not specifically identify which nations may pose missile threats, but experts indicate that Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are potential adversaries. The possibility of submarine-launched attacks further complicates the challenges faced by any missile defense strategy.
Marion Messmer, a senior research fellow at Chatham House, highlighted that Israel's missile defense challenges are significantly less complex than those the U.S. would encounter, citing geographical limitations that make defense easier in Israel.
Despite the challenges, the concept of enhancing U.S. missile defense capabilities has some backing in Washington. During his first term, Mr. Trump pledged to revamp the nation’s missile defense systems. Robert Soofer, a former U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense, argued in a recent paper that the current strategies for homeland missile defense may no longer meet U.S. national security objectives, particularly in light of North Korea’s expanding missile capabilities and the need to deter both Russia and China.