President Donald Trump has launched a bold new initiative: a $175 billion “Golden Dome” missile defense system, designed to shield the US from long-range missile threats by adversaries like China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. Trump says it will be “fully operational” by the end of his term in 2029. But some critics argue this plan is less about keeping Americans safe and more about enriching Trump’s allies-particularly Elon Musk.The initial $25 billion down payment-approved by Republicans in Congress-will launch a network of space-based interceptors and sensors, building on decades of missile defense efforts. Yet, even before a single satellite is launched, the program is already mired in controversy.Why it matters
- The
Golden Dome ’s promise is tantalizing: a “100 percent protective shield,” as Trump claimed, that would guard against everything from hypersonic missiles to drones. But the reality is murkier. Experts say no system on Earth can reliably shoot down every missile. More troublingly, the push to build Golden Dome-like so many missile defense programs before it-looks set to become a cash cow for defense contractors, regardless of its effectiveness. - Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX, is poised to be among the biggest winners. His company is lobbying for the contract to build the “custody layer” of the system: thousands of satellites that would detect missile launches and potentially intercept them as they soar through the atmosphere. Musk’s influence, congressional Democrats warn, may already be shaping how the Pentagon awards these lucrative deals.
The big picture
- An old dream, new dollars: The US has been chasing the dream of a national missile shield for decades, dating back to President Ronald Reagan’s 1983 “Star Wars” program. Back then, the idea was to use space-based lasers and interceptors to render nuclear missiles “obsolete.” It never worked-but the money kept flowing. Since 1962, over $531 billion has been spent on missile defense, according to Stephen Schwartz, a nuclear budget analyst.
- Musk’s starring role: Musk’s companies-SpaceX, Palantir, and Anduril-are central players in the Golden Dome push. Initial design contracts alone are expected to bring in $6-10 billion, according to Reuters. Musk’s proposed “subscription model,” similar to his Starlink satellites, would lock the Pentagon into long-term payments-and give Musk, as Democrats warn, “unacceptable ongoing leverage over US national security.”
- Skepticism and scrutiny: “This is serious, serious money,” warned Thomas Withington of the Royal United Services Institute. Congressional Democrats, led by the late Representative Gerry Connolly, have demanded an ethics probe into Musk’s role. “This raises concerns about whether defense contracts to build a Golden Dome are an effective way to protect Americans or are meant to enrich Mr Musk and other elites,” they wrote in a letter to the Pentagon.
What they are saying
- China’s alarm bells: Beijing called the Golden Dome plan a “strong offensive” that could destabilize global security. “The United States, in pursuing a ‘US-first’ policy, is obsessed with seeking absolute security for itself,” said Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning. “This violates the principle that the security of all countries should not be compromised.”
- North Korea’s fury: Pyongyang warned the project could spark a “nuclear war in space.” North Korea’s foreign ministry described it as “a very dangerous ‘threatening initiative’” that would “stimulate the security concerns of nuclear weapons states.”
- Expert caution: “The more important goal here is deterrence, not 100 percent protection,” said Iain Boyd, aerospace engineer at the University of Colorado Boulder. Even Israel’s Iron Dome-Trump’s inspiration-can be overwhelmed by large barrages of missiles. “No missile defense system will ever provide 100% protection,” Boyd noted.
Zoom in: The technical challenges
- Golden Dome is an immense technical lift. It would require:
- Hundreds of satellites to track missile launches and trajectories-space-based sensors and interceptors that have never been fully tested at scale.
- New interceptor technology to catch hypersonic missiles-flying at many times the speed of sound and capable of sharp maneuvers.
- Laser weapons and directed energy to shoot down missiles in the “boost phase,” a feat that’s never been proven outside of lab experiments.
- Even experts who believe in missile defense see the timeline as wildly optimistic. “Three years seems like a very aggressive timeline,” said Iain Boyd. “Putting all of this highly complex system together is likely to take more than three years.”
Between the linesCritics say the Golden Dome is less about genuine security than about reviving a decades-old arms race-this time in space. “Contractors and their government supporters take an old, devalued concept, pump up its value with exaggerated promises of instant success, secure big, multiyear contracts to build it, then get even more contracts for more systems when the ones they built don’t work,” reported the New Republic.The Congressional Budget Office estimates the real cost of the Golden Dome could hit $831 billion over two decades-far higher than Trump’s $175 billion projection. “The challenge with the statements from yesterday is that they lack the details needed to develop a model of what this constellation would really look like,” said Thomas Roberts of the Georgia Institute of Technology. The Pentagon’s own Missile Defense Review admits that adversaries could simply launch enough missiles to overwhelm the system.Musk’s involvement adds another layer of concern. Democrats say his “formal or informal” role in government decisions-while also pushing SpaceX’s interests-may violate ethics rules and criminal prohibitions against using a public office for private gain. So far, the administration has shown no signs of halting Musk’s lobbying.Special: Is Golden Dome a pump and dump scam to make Musk rich?Here’s how it would work: Like classic “pump and dump” scams on Wall Street, contractors hype the Golden Dome’s promise-near-perfect defense, cutting-edge technology, easy wins. Congress responds with massive funding. But when the systems fall short (as they historically have), the fix is more spending, more satellites, more “upgrades.” And the original contractors-especially Musk-get even richer, the New Republic report said.SpaceX’s push for a “subscription model” could lock in decades of payments from the Pentagon, similar to Starlink’s lucrative contracts in Ukraine. “Mr Musk could, as he allegedly did in Ukraine, determine when to provide the US government with access to Golden Dome satellite systems,” Democrats warned.Musk’s defenders say this is about national security, not personal enrichment. Trump himself has said that Musk’s companies are vital to American defense. But history suggests that missile defense efforts have always had a whiff of boondoggle about them-more about feeding contractors than protecting cities.
Think of it as a “pump and dump” scam, where investors buy a cheap stock, inflate its value with hype and exaggerated expectations, then get rich by selling the stock at the inflated levels. Here, contractors and their government supporters take an old, devalued concept, pump up its value with exaggerated promises of instant success, secure big, multiyear contracts to build it, then get even more contracts for more systems when the ones they built don’t work.
An article in the New Republic
What’s nextFor now, the Golden Dome’s first $25 billion is tied to a broader $150 billion defense package. That funding still faces hurdles in Congress. Industry insiders warn that if it’s not approved soon, the whole project could be delayed or downsized.Meanwhile, China, Russia, and North Korea are watching closely. The Kremlin signaled that the Golden Dome might force a resumption of arms control talks-potentially a rare opening for diplomacy amid renewed fears of an arms race.As for Musk? He’s keeping a lower profile in Washington, but his companies are maneuvering behind the scenes to secure contracts. The Democrats’ letter demanding an ethics probe could be the start of a broader political battle over the intersection of big tech, big defense, and big money.(With inputs from agencies)
