Follow us on social

google cta
Donald Trump

Trump doubles down on wasteful American Iron Dome

Recreating the project on American soil would be hugely expensive and largely pointless

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Newly re-instated President Donald Trump floated the idea of an American “Iron Dome” missile defense system at last night’s Commander-in-Chief inaugural ball.

“We will again build the most powerful military the world has ever seen,” Trump proclaimed. “We're …doing the Iron Dome, all made in America. We're going to have a nice iron dome. We are going to protect us with the use of the Iron Dome.”

Trump’s called for the Dome elsewhere, saying last month at a rally in Phoenix that he will “direct [the] military to begin construction of the great Iron Dome missile defense shield, which will be made all in the USA.”

While Trump has not provided any specifics, an American Iron Dome would presumably be modeled on the operational Israeli “Iron Dome” missile defense system, which intercepts and eliminates incoming projectile threats with missiles. Notably, American taxpayers have already contributed substantively to the Israeli project, with almost $3 billion towards its production, equipment, and maintenance since 2011.

But Israel’s Iron Dome, where missiles must be able to hit projectiles anywhere in Israel’s air space, is difficult to maintain and can be overwhelmed by volleys of intensive attacks. And it’s extremely expensive: a singular Iron Dome missile costs about $50,000 to produce.

Considering the sheer size of the United States, applying the same project to American borders, if even possible, would be an extremely expensive endeavor. And considering the low risk of a substantive aerial attack to the United States, it’s a wasteful one.

What's more, Iron Dome's not properly equipped to take on long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), the weapon most likely to be employed in an aerial attack.

"The most likely nuclear threat to the United States would be a long-range intercontinental ballistic missile which would travel at incredible speeds above the atmosphere and re-enter to hit target in the United States,” says William Hartung, a Senior Research Fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. “The Iron Dome system used by Israel has zero capability to intercept an ICBM. And efforts to build a system that can have spent tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars over the last 40 years — only to produce systems that can't pass a realistic test.”

“A crash program for Iron Dome will be great for arms contractors, but will do nothing to improve U.S. defenses," Hartung explains.

The U.S. military budget already sits at about $850 billion, a significant increase from the $700 billion budget from only three years ago. It’s high time to reconsider whether gargantuan military-might projects like Iron Dome are in our interest.


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

Top Image Credit: Donald Trump (White House photo)
google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Gaza tent city
Top photo credit: Palestinian Mohammed Abu Halima, 43, sits in front of his tent with his children in a camp for displaced Palestinians in Gaza City, Gaza, on December 11, 2025. Matrix Images / Mohammed Qita

Four major dynamics in Gaza War that will impact 2026

Middle East

Just ahead of the New Year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to visit President Donald Trump in Florida today, no doubt with a wish list for 2026. Already there have been reports that he will ask Trump to help attack Iran’s nuclear program, again.

Meanwhile, despite the media narrative, the war in Gaza is not over, and more specifically, it has not ended in a clear victory for Netanyahu’s IDF forces. Nor has the New Year brought solace to the Palestinians — at least 71,000 have been killed since October 2023. But there have been a number of important dynamics and developments in 2025 that will affect not only Netanyahu’s “asks” but the future of security in Israel and the region.

keep readingShow less
Sokoto Nigeria
Top photo credit: Map of Nigeria (Shutterstock/Juan Alejandro Bernal)

Trump's Christmas Day strikes on Nigeria beg question: Why Sokoto?

Africa

For the first time since President Trump publicly excoriated Nigeria’s government for allegedly condoning a Christian genocide, Washington made good on its threat of military action on Christmas Day when U.S. forces conducted airstrikes against two alleged major positions of the Islamic State (IS-Sahel) in northwestern Sokoto state.

According to several sources familiar with the operation, the airstrike involved at least 16 GPS-guided munitions launched from the Navy destroyer, USS Paul Ignatius, stationed in the Gulf of Guinea. Debris from unexpended munition consistent with Tomahawk cruise missile components have been recovered in the village of Jabo, Sokoto state, as well nearly 600 miles away in Offa in Kwara state.

keep readingShow less
What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?
Top image credit: Voodison328 via shutterstock.com

What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?

Global Crises

Earlier this month in Geneva, delegates to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty’s 22nd Meeting of States Parties confronted the most severe crisis in the convention’s nearly three-decade history. That crisis was driven by an unprecedented convergence of coordinated withdrawals by five European states and Ukraine’s attempt to “suspend” its treaty obligations amid an ongoing armed conflict.

What unfolded was not only a test of the resilience of one of the world’s most successful humanitarian disarmament treaties, but also a critical moment for the broader system of international norms designed to protect civilians during and after war. Against a background of heightened tensions resulting from the war in Ukraine and unusual divisions among the traditional convention champions, the countries involved made decisions that will have long-term implications.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.