logo
The many holes in Trump's Golden Dome

The many holes in Trump's Golden Dome

Asia Times25-05-2025

The Trump administration's recent announcement of a 'Golden Dome' strategic missile defense shield to protect the US is the most ambitious such project since President Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) of the 1980s.
The SDI program – better known by its somewhat mocking nickname of 'Star Wars' – sparked a heated debate over its technical feasibility. Ultimately, it would never become operational. But do we now have the technologies to realize the Golden Dome shield – or is this initiative similarly destined to be shelved?
A completed Golden Dome missile defense shield would supposedly defend the US against the full spectrum of air and missile threats, including long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and those with shorter ranges, any of which could be armed with nuclear warheads.
But Golden Dome would also aim to work against cruise missiles and hypersonic weapons such as boost-glide vehicles, which use a rocket to reach hypersonic speeds (more than five times the speed of sound) before continuing their trajectory unpowered.
The missile defense shield could theoretically also protect against warheads placed in space that can be commanded to re-enter the atmosphere and destroy targets on Earth, known as fractional orbital bombardment systems.
Ballistic missiles arguably pose the biggest threat because of the sheer numbers in the hands of other nuclear-armed nations. ICBMs follow a three-phase trajectory: the boost, midcourse and terminal phases.
The boost phase consists of a few minutes of powered flight as the missile's rocket engines propel it into space. In the midcourse phase, the missile travels unpowered through space for about 20-25 minutes. Finally, during the terminal phase, the missile re-enters the atmosphere and hits the target.
Plans for the Golden Dome are likely to involve defensive weapons that target ballistic missiles during all three phases of their trajectory.
Boost-phase missile defence is attractive because it would only require shooting down a single target. During the midcourse phase, the ballistic missile will deploy its warhead – the section that includes the explosive charge – but could also release several decoy warheads.
Even with the best radar systems, discriminating between the real warhead from the decoys is incredibly difficult. One part of the Golden Dome will involve targeting ballistic missiles during their boost phase. US Air Force
However, there are big questions over the technical feasibility of targeting ballistic missiles during their boost phase – and there is also a limited time window, given that this phase is relatively short.
The weapons platforms designed to target a ballistic missile in its boost phase could consist of a large satellite in low-Earth orbit, armed with multiple small missiles called interceptors. An interceptor could be deployed if a nuclear-armed ballistic missile is launched at the US.
One study conducted by the American Physical Society suggested that, under generous assumptions, a space-based interceptor platform might be able to destroy a target from 530 miles (850km) away. This measure is known as the weapon's 'kill radius.'
Even with a kill radius of this size, a space-based interceptor system would require hundreds or even thousands of satellites, each armed with small missiles to achieve effective regional coverage.
It might be possible to get around this constraint, though, by using directed-energy weapons such as powerful lasers or even particle beam weapons, which use high-energy beams of atomic or subatomic particles.
A critical vulnerability of such a system, however, is that an adversary could use anti-satellite weapons – missiles launched from the ground – or other offensive actions such as cyberattacks to destroy or disable some of the interceptor satellites. This could establish a temporary corridor for an adversary's ballistic missile to pass through.
An idea for a space-based boost-phase defense system called Brilliant Pebbles was proposed towards the end of the 1980s. Rather than having large satellites with multiple missiles, it entailed having around 1,000 small individual missiles in orbit. It would have also used about 60 orbiting sensors called Brilliant Eyes to detect launches.
Brilliant Pebbles was cancelled by President Bill Clinton's administration in 1994. But it provides another template for technologies that could be used by Golden Dome.
Options for destroying ballistic missiles during the midcourse of their trajectories include existing weapons systems such as the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system and the US Navy's ship-based Aegis platform.
Unlike midcourse-phase missile defense (which must cover a large geographical area), terminal-phase interception is a last line of defense. It usually involves destroying incoming warheads that have re-entered the atmosphere from space.
A plan for destroying single warheads during the terminal trajectory phase could use future versions of existing weapons platforms, such as the Patriot Advanced Capability 3 Missile Segment Enhancement or the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense.
However, while there has been progress in this technology in the decades since Star Wars was proposed, the debate continues over whether these systems work effectively.
Ultimately, it is the huge costs, as well as political opposition, that could pose the biggest hurdles to implementing an effective Golden Dome system. Trump's proposal has revived the idea of missile defense in the US. But it remains unclear whether its most ambitious components will ever be realized.
Jack O'Doherty is a PhD Candidate in nuclear strategy, University of Leicester
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Japan should decline Trump's F-47 offer
Why Japan should decline Trump's F-47 offer

Asia Times

time3 hours ago

  • Asia Times

Why Japan should decline Trump's F-47 offer

Trump's surprise F-47 fighter pitch to Japan exposes the deep tensions between alliance loyalty and Tokyo's growing pursuit of strategic autonomy in a world of contested tech, arms sales and sovereignty. Last month, Asahi Shimbun reported that US President Donald Trump pitched Boeing's F-47 sixth-generation fighter jet and the C-17 transport aircraft to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba during an unexpected phone call. Trump, who reportedly praised US military aircraft, casually asked Ishiba whether Japan was interested in acquiring US-made fighters, noting that the F-47—believed to be named in honor of Trump as the 47th US president—would replace the F-22. Officials say the topic arose because Ishiba had previously shown interest in the C-17, prompting speculation that Trump viewed Japan as a potential defense customer. Despite Trump's remarks, Japan remained cautious, citing challenges in pilot training and maintenance as key challenges. Japan is concurrently developing a fighter jet with the UK and Italy, complicating procurement decisions. The call, which took place before Japan's trade negotiator left for the US, defied concerns that Trump would pressure Japan on tariffs. Instead, Trump appeared eager to discuss his Middle East trip and reinforce personal ties with Ishiba. Some analysts have suggested Trump sought a receptive audience amid criticism of his regional strategy. The two leaders agreed to meet during the upcoming G-7 summit in Canada, where discussions on trade and security could further clarify Japan's defense priorities. Trump's F-47 pitch underscores Japan's dilemma: whether to invest in a high-tech, alliance-dependent jet that risks eroding its strategic autonomy or hold out for sovereign capabilities that may arrive too late. In a 2025 Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) report, Sadamasa Oue argues that Japan must acquire sixth-generation fighters in line with its shift from anti-airspace intrusion measures to offensive counter-air operations alongside potential adversaries such as China, which is developing next-generation fighters, including the J-36 and J-50. Sixth-generation fighter capabilities broadly feature extreme stealth, flight efficiency from subsonic to multi-Mach speeds, 'smart skins' with radar, extremely sensitive sensors, optionally manned capability and directed-energy weapons. However, Brandon Weichert argues in a May 2024 article for 1945 that the advent of autonomous systems could make another expensive manned warplane system, such as the F-47, wasteful. Weichert contends that as drone technology advances, it gradually takes on the characteristics and capabilities of manned systems. He says that the current crop of fifth-generation aircraft, such as the F-35 that Japan already operates, continues to be upgraded to keep pace with evolving threats from near-peer adversaries. In line with that, Breaking Defense reported last month that a 'fifth-generation plus' F-35 could have optionally manned capability as part of upgrades that aim to bring the aircraft to '80% sixth-generation capability' at 'half the price.' Trump's F-47 pitch highlights Japan's struggle to balance its reliance on alliances with the need for strategic independence, especially as delays in its Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) raise concerns about the UK and Italy's commitment to the trilateral project. The Japan Times reported last month that Japan is growing increasingly doubtful that the GCAP program will meet its 2035 target date and could be pushed into the 2040s due to a perceived lack of urgency from the UK and Italy. However, the US has a checkered record of sharing sensitive fighter technology with Japan. Mario Daniels points out in a July 2024 article published in the peer-reviewed History and Technology journal that during the FSX jet fighter controversy in the 1980s and 1990s, the US withheld advanced fighter jet technology from Japan due to fears that sharing dual-use technology would erode its economic and military superiority. Daniels says at the time, US officials increasingly viewed Japan as a formidable high-tech competitor whose access to US aerospace know-how could empower its civilian aircraft industry to rival Boeing. As a result, he notes that the US initially imposed export controls, which were originally devised for the Soviet bloc, against Japan. He says these controls black-boxed critical systems, such as software, radar, and composite materials, to prevent irreversible technological transfer and preserve US strategic advantage. Further, Christopher Hughes points out in a March 2025 article in the peer-reviewed Defense Studies journal that as Japan moves up the defense production ladder into more sensitive technologies that could compete with the US, the latter could increase demands on the Japan Self-Defense Forces (JSDF) to buy its equipment to strengthen interoperability and alleviate trade frictions. Hughes pointed out that Trump was transactional in managing the US-Japan alliance, insisting that Japan purchase possibly overpriced US equipment in politically motivated deals for security guarantees, even if that hardware may not align with Japan's defense requirements. Japan's changing arms export policies may also play into US concerns about getting outcompeted by Japan in weapon sales. In March 2024, the Associated Press (AP) reported that Japan's cabinet approved a plan to sell future GCAP next-generation fighter jets co-developed with the UK and Italy to other countries. 'In order to achieve a fighter aircraft that meets the necessary performance and to avoid jeopardizing the defense of Japan, it is necessary to transfer finished products from Japan to countries other than partner countries,' said Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi, as quoted in the report. However, maintaining strategic autonomy when it comes to critical capabilities could be a significant factor in any Japan decision not to acquire F-47s. 'The desire to retain significant sovereign capabilities in each of the three (Japan, UK, Italy) nations… is being reinforced by the concerns around the US's behavior,' says Andrew Howard, director of Future Combat Air at Leonardo UK, as quoted in a Financial Times article last month. The F-35 is a case study in how the US maintains control over exported military hardware. Brent Eastwood writes in a March 2025 article for 1945 that rumors have persisted about a 'kill switch' being installed in exported F-35s, which would act as a means to veto geopolitical behavior that is against its interests. While the US F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) states that no such kill switch exists, Stacey Pettyjohn warns in a March 2025 Breaking Defense article that the US could cut off maintenance networks, suspend spare parts shipments and stop critical software updates. Without those, Pettyjohn said the F-35 could still fly, but it would be far more vulnerable to enemy air defenses and fighters, and without US spare parts and maintenance, its international operators would struggle to keep the jets flying. In a world of contested skies and transactional diplomacy, Japan's next jet won't just define its airpower—it will define its strategic independence.

Mismanaged early voting stirs voter distrust in S Korea election
Mismanaged early voting stirs voter distrust in S Korea election

Asia Times

time18 hours ago

  • Asia Times

Mismanaged early voting stirs voter distrust in S Korea election

Early voting for South Korea's 2025 presidential election took place on May 29 and 30 but, as in previous years, it was marred by troubling irregularities and signs of mismanagement. In past presidential and general elections, the National Election Commission (NEC) dismissed concerns as 'simple mistakes' or 'minor mistakes.' This time, however, public awareness and scrutiny were far greater. Korean citizens actively monitored polling stations and mainstream media outlets reported on the irregularities, backed by clear evidence of procedural misconduct. Over two days of early voting, a pattern of serious breaches emerged in polling sites across multiple regions, raising alarms about the credibility of the electoral process. In Sinchon-dong, Seoul, 30 to 40 ballots were removed from the polling station – an act strictly prohibited under NEC guidelines. In Gimpo and Bucheon, Gyeonggi Province, ballot boxes intended for the presidential election were found to contain ballots from the 22nd general election in 2024. In Gangnam, Seoul, a poll worker was arrested after using a spouse's ID to vote illegally. In Yongin, ballots pre-marked in favor of Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae-myung were discovered inside return envelopes designated for out-of-district voters. This prompted a police investigation. At another polling station, due to overcrowding, unmarked ballots were distributed to voters waiting outside. Some reportedly left the area – ballot in hand – to visit nearby restaurants before returning to vote, also in violation of NEC procedural rules. Growing suspicion of foreign influence has added further complexity. Former Chinese nationals who had acquired South Korean citizenship shared images and posts about their participation in early voting on Chinese social media platforms. This fueled public anxiety about possible Chinese interference in the presidential election. Concerns over the integrity of South Korea's election have drawn international attention. US conservative commentator Gordon G. Chang – known for his hawkish stance on China and publicly praised by President Trump (Trump said to Chang at the 2023 Conservative Political Action Committee gathering, 'I agree with almost everything you said, almost everything') – spoke out Thursday against the NEC's handling of early voting, saying, 'Fraud is widespread in the South Korean election.' Indeed, as far back as January 7 this year, Chang was spreading to his followers on X the slogan 'Stop the Steal in South Korea!' The National Election Integrity Association (NEIA), a US-based organization, sent a delegation to South Korea to observe the process. On May 30, the group released a public statement citing numerous violations in the early voting system. Among the NEIA observers is Morse Tan, former US ambassador-at-large for global criminal justice, appointed in the first Trump administration. Other members of the group are retired US Marine Corps Colonels John R. Mills (a former Pentagon cybersecurity expert) and Grant Newsham (whose articles frequently appear in Asia Times) and scholar Bradley Thayer. Faced with evidence, the NEC issued a rare apology. On May 29, the commission acknowledged problems in the early voting process. As further incidents were exposed, a second apology followed. On May 31, NEC Chairperson Rho Tae-ak stated, 'I sincerely apologize for causing confusion among the voters. We will manage more thoroughly in the upcoming election-day voting to ensure voters can cast their ballots with confidence.' Still, public skepticism remains – especially since every known error has so far favored the same candidate, Lee Jae-myung. Calls for reform are intensifying. Some South Koreans argue that early voting should be abolished altogether, citing the frequency and severity of past controversies. Others propose narrowing the four-day time gap between early voting and official election day to allow for better oversight and reduce opportunities for manipulation. A more forward-looking solution is the adoption of blockchain-based voting systems. By timestamping every action and making records immutable, blockchain technology could offer a secure, transparent alternative. Brazil offers a real-world example. In 2020, the country implemented a cryptocurrency called Decred's blockchain through the Voto Legal platform to track campaign donations transparently. Then, in 2022, Brazil again used Decred's blockchain – this time to record the official campaign platforms of major candidates. The aim was to verify the authenticity of policy proposals and fight disinformation. The 2025 South Korean presidential early voting has exposed systemic vulnerabilities that can no longer be ignored. As citizens and international observers voice growing concern, the NEC's credibility continues to erode. If South Korea is to restore public trust and protect the foundation of its democracy, bold, transparent reforms – whether procedural or technological – must move from discussion to action. Hanjin Lew, a political commentator specializing in East Asian affairs, is a former international spokesman for South Korean conservative parties.

Elon Musk denies using drugs on Trump campaign trail
Elon Musk denies using drugs on Trump campaign trail

RTHK

timea day ago

  • RTHK

Elon Musk denies using drugs on Trump campaign trail

Elon Musk denies using drugs on Trump campaign trail Elon Musk looks on during a news conference with US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office. Photo: AFP Elon Musk on Saturday denied a report that he used ketamine and other drugs extensively last year on the 2024 campaign trail. The New York Times reported on Friday that the billionaire adviser to President Donald Trump used so much ketamine, a powerful anaesthetic, that he developed bladder problems. The newspaper said the world's richest person also took ecstasy and mushrooms and travelled with a pill box last year, adding that it was not known whether Musk also took drugs while heading the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) after Trump took power in January. In a post on Saturday on X, Musk said: "To be clear, I am NOT taking drugs! The New York Times was lying their ass off." He added: "I tried 'prescription' ketamine a few years ago and said so on X, so this not even news. It helps for getting out of dark mental holes, but haven't taken it since then." Musk first dodged a question about his drug use at a bizarre farewell appearance on Friday with Trump in the Oval Office in which the Tesla and SpaceX boss sported a noticeable black eye as he formally ended his role as Trump's main cost-cutter at DOGE, which fired tens of thousands of civil servants. News of the injury drew substantial attention as it came right after the Times report on his alleged drug use. The daily recalled erratic behaviour such as Musk giving an enthusiastic Nazi-style salute last year. Musk said he got the injury while horsing around with his young son, named X, when he told the child to hit him in the face. "And he did. Turns out even a five-year-old punching you in the face actually is..." he added, before tailing off. Later on Friday, when a reporter asked Trump if he was aware of Musk's "regular drug use," Trump responded: "I wasn't." "I think Elon is a fantastic guy," he added. Musk has previously admitted to taking ketamine, saying he was prescribed it to treat a "negative frame of mind" and suggesting his use of drugs benefited his work. (AFP)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store