Trump's Golden Dome plan could launch new era of weapons in space
US President Donald Trump's Golden Dome missile defence concept revives a controversial, decades-old initiative whose ambitious construction could upend norms in outer space and reshape relations between the world's top space powers.
The announcement of Golden Dome, a vast network of satellites and weapons in Earth's orbit set to cost $175bn (R3.13-trillion), could sharply escalate the militarisation of space, a trend that has intensified over the last decade, space analysts say.
While the world's biggest space powers — the US, Russia and China — have put military and intelligence assets in orbit since the 1960s, they have done so mostly in secrecy.
Under former President Joe Biden, US Space Force officials had grown vocal about a need for greater offensive space capabilities due to space-based threats from Russia and China.
When Trump announced his Golden Dome plan in January, it was a clear shift in strategy, one that emphasises a bold move into space with expensive, untested technology that could be a financial boon to US defence contractors.
The concept includes space-based missiles that would launch from satellites in orbit to intercept conventional and nuclear missiles launched from Earth.
"I think it's opening a Pandora's box," said Victoria Samson, director of space security and stability at the Secure World Foundation think tank in Washington, referring to deploying missiles in space. "We haven't truly thought about the long-term consequences for doing so."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
eNCA
4 hours ago
- eNCA
Trump to attend NATO summit in The Hague
THE HAGUE - US President Donald Trump will attend a NATO summit in The Hague later in June, where his demands to ramp up defense spending will dominate the agenda, the White House said Tuesday. Trump has long criticized NATO partners for not paying their fair share and had not previously confirmed he would attend the meeting, his first with the transatlantic alliance since his return to power. "I can confirm he will be going to the NATO summit, yes," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a briefing when asked by AFP if Trump would attend. Ukraine's war with Russia will also be on the agenda, with President Volodymyr Zelensky confirming on Tuesday that his country has been invited. Zelensky and Trump had a major Oval Office row in February. Republican Trump threatened to withdraw altogether from NATO during his first term, and has since threatened to defend only those allies that he thinks are spending enough on defense. His administration has also raised the prospect that it could look to shift forces away from Europe to focus on threats elsewhere like China -- while causing tensions with allies Canada and Denmark by threatening their territory. His core demand is for NATO members to spend five percent of GDP on defense, claiming that Washington is bearing most of the burden for their defense. None of NATO's 32 members -- including the United States -- currently hit that level. To make him happy, alliance chief and former Dutch premier Mark Rutte has floated a proposal for 3.5 percent of GDP on direct defense spending by 2032, and 1.5 percent of broader security-related expenditures. Such a deal could let Trump claim a win by reaching his headline figure even if not all of it is new spending.
eNCA
7 hours ago
- eNCA
Trade war cuts global economic growth outlook: OECD
WASHINGTON - The OECD slashed its annual global growth forecast on Tuesday, warning that US President Donald Trump's tariffs blitz would stifle the world economy -- hitting the United States especially hard. After 3.3-percent growth last year, the world economy is now expected to expand by a "modest" 2.9 percent in 2025 and 2026, the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said. In its previous report in March, the OECD had forecast growth of 3.1 percent for 2025 and 3.0 percent for 2026. Since then, Trump has launched a wave of tariffs that has rattled financial markets. "The global outlook is becoming increasingly challenging," said the OECD, an economic policy group of 38 mostly wealthy countries. It said "substantial increases" in trade barriers, tighter financial conditions, weaker business and consumer confidence, and heightened policy uncertainty will all have "marked adverse effects on growth" if they persist. The OECD downgraded its 2025 growth forecast for the United States from 2.2 percent to 1.6 percent. The world's biggest economy is expected to slow further next year to 1.5 percent. Trump, who has insisted that the tariffs would spark a manufacturing revival and restore a US economic "Golden Age", posted on his Truth Social platform before the OECD report's publication: "Because of Tariffs, our Economy is BOOMING!" The OECD holds a ministerial meeting in Paris on Tuesday and Wednesday. US and EU trade negotiators are expected to hold talks on the sidelines of the gathering after Trump threatened to hit the European Union with 50-percent tariffs. The Group of Seven advanced economies is also holding a meeting focused on trade. "For everyone, including the United States, the best option is that countries sit down and get an agreement," OECD chief economist Alvaro Pereira said in an interview with AFP. "Avoiding further trade fragmentation is absolutely key in the next few months and years," Pereira said. Trump imposed in April a baseline tariff of 10 percent on imports from around the world. He unveiled higher tariffs on dozens of countries but has paused them until July to allow time for negotiations. The US president has also imposed 25-percent tariffs on cars and now plans to raise those on steel and aluminium to 50 percent on Wednesday.
Daily Maverick
7 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
After the Bell: Who's afraid of losing Agoa?
One of the great risks of the debate around Agoa is that it gives us something else to blame, when we should blame ourselves for our poor economy. And we must remember that it is not true that there is no cost to us from Agoa. One of the most boring discussions I've heard around our economy over the past five years has been posed as 'will we keep Agoa?' I hear it everywhere, even now, when US President Donald Trump has made it clear that he wants to tear up the entire trade rule book. I can understand why we keep hearing about it. There are certain sections of our economy that really benefit from it. Because of Agoa (the African Growth and Opportunity Act), they have been able to grow and employ people. And some of the arguments they can make about why Agoa matters to us are important. Free market access to the US is great for the car industry, and for our farmers. It means they are exporting goods produced here, earning dollars in return and basically importing jobs. People are employed, their kids are kept in good schools. You could argue that the entire community around Daily Maverick journalist Estelle Ellis and the rest of the Baywatch team will be badly hit if it all comes to an end. And that would be true. Farmers, too, had a bumper season exporting to the US in the first quarter of the year. They were able to increase the amount of goods they sent there dramatically in that quarter. When I first heard that, I thought, perhaps, like the Chinese (and I'm sure others), they had been rushing goods into US ports before new tariffs could come into effect. But that amazing agricultural economics guru Wandile Sihlobo told me on The Money Show on Monday night that this is not the case. It happened because our farmers have created a strong demand for their goods. And, like our car industry, we are basically importing jobs. But we should be aware that, despite these very loud and important voices in our national debate, this is not the end of the story. The Brookings Institute estimated nearly 18 months ago that 'In total, a loss of Agoa benefits would lead to a GDP decline of just 0.06%'. To put that into context, our GDP grew by just 0.1% in the first quarter of this year. At the same time, the South African Reserve Bank has generally said that load shedding was costing our GDP 2% every year. So it may matter, but only in the context of our complete inability to take action to grow our own economy. One of the great risks of this debate around Agoa is that it gives us something else to blame, when we should blame ourselves for our poor economy. And we must remember that it is not true that there is no cost to us from Agoa. In fact, a few weeks ago I was almost taken aback when an American investor (one of those wonderful people who travels the world, and is hugely interested and fascinated by it) asked me point-blank: 'Why do you all care so much about Agoa?' He even suggested that actually it went against our interests. This is because of some of the small print. If you look at the text of the Act that passed through the US Congress, the conditions of eligibility are designed to literally create African economies in the US mould. Of course, as we were so often reminded during the Lady R saga, it says that you must 'not engage in activities that undermine United States national security or foreign policy interests'. This is a wonderful stick for the US to beat us with. If it wants, it could define our opposition to Israel's genocidal war on the people of Gaza as 'undermining' US 'foreign policy interests'. To be clear, there is much in Agoa that is good. It mentions that workers must be protected, that there should be political freedom and things like that. But it is still a tool of foreign policy. Yes, Agoa is helping African countries to develop. But it is also a useful instrument of control. Agoa looks finished anyway. In reality, the US system of government appears to be giving Trump whatever he wants. So far, very few Republicans have spoken against his tariff policies. But the markets are speaking. And the fact that the bond markets have forced Trump to basically chicken out has given us the wonderful phrase Taco (Trump always chickens out). So, I do think we need to be less afraid of him. He is slowly being revealed as all bark and very little bite. What we really need to do is to find Americans who lose out if we cannot export to the US. The US citrus industry, for example, needs our oranges to keep the market interested in oranges during their non-growing season. And we should not forget those strange people who drive BMW X3s. The models sold in the US are only made here. And even if they are rubbish cars (who can forget Jeremy Clarkson having to throw the sound guy out of the car to go and push, even now it's still worth watching), there is still a lobby for them in the US. I think we need to stop worrying so much about Agoa.
