The Trump missile defense program has now officially kicked off and could end up being one of the costlier defense programs in U.S. history. With a desired budget of $151 billion over ten years, the program aims to develop a multi-layered system that can defeat ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missiles during all portions of flight.
View this post on Instagram
The announcement confirms that the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (“MDA”) has initiated a dynamic and extremely ambitious program by the Trump administration that represents a significant shift in the United States’ strategic capabilities against a changing threat environment around the world.
A brief overview
A Layered Defense to Combat Modern Missile Threats
The program, as envisioned, will be built around a next generation defense grid which will be able to detect, track and defeat a variety of potential threats with land-based interceptors, advanced radar systems, and possibly satellite-based assets.
This is a “next generation” missile defense program, because instead of looking to mitigate a specific type of threat, or for a specific geographical region, next generation means redundancy. If achieved, this future system will protect the target without relying on “centers of gravity” which make up last available options to intercept the threat. It will fully protect against launch (a near impossible task) to impact (the warhead hit) which will provide a “360” degree strategic shield to not only the U.S. homeland (dual purpose strategy), but also our partners and allies.
The Trump Missile Defense Project: Vision vs Reality
While the Trump missile defense project looks great in theory, it may not be well planned in reality, as not all want to see this become either a reality or cost-effective. Trump has committed $175 billion on going live with the system in the 3-year time frame, and legislation has only earmarked $25 billion as an initial down-payment.
Even the Congressional Budget Office has indicated the near-term costs could check-in at approximately $542 billion. While CBO has echoed many of the concerns surrounding the feasibility of the program and general oversight.
Some faithful analysts posit that the degree of difference between the rhetoric and actual resources is a study in political theater, not clarification of strategy. However, the DOD is proceeding, and the defense. The security complex is already moving to execute.
Major Defense Industry Players and Tech Firms Starting Building Claims to Billions
Major U.S. defense contractors are lining up to express a formal interest in being a part of some developmental capacity, with Lockheed Martin (with its MARCUS system), RTX, Northrop Grumman, along with a similar portfolio of years of working experience with comment missile defense, policy (aerospace engineering), and large-scale system of systems integration.
Even technology and consulting firms, like Booz Allen Hamilton, are aligning for potential engagement as needed relative to their capability offerings, with respect to cyber and systems architecture expertise.
In a way, Elon Musk’s (SpaceX) organization is quite weak in a prospective partnership. In the U.S. market, SpaceX has played the dominant role in the satellite launch market, and could offer the critical orbital infrastructure. Nevertheless, due to Elon Musk’s personal relationship with Donald Trump, which has been very tumultuous, it seems reasonable not to expect that either can find common ground.
A Strategic Bet with Global Implications – Trump Missile Defense Project
Whether or not the Trump missile defense project can achieve its goal, one thing is certain: the project’s inception is a general indication of the growing need to prepare for the next generation warfare era, where modern challenges, including hypersonic missiles, AI-guided weapon platforms, and cyber aggressio,n will need to be addressed “head-on”.
If successful, the impact on U.S. deterrence could be demonstrably changed, compared to the possible developing arms race of advanced defense technologies. If this were to fail, it would likely be one of many cautionary tales of over-promising and overspending.
