The United States is not ready enough for an imaginable long -range missile strike through Russia, China or North Korea, according to a new report notified through Newsweek, which provides a possible road map for the president -elect Donald Trump is presented in the combination of the American edition of the very planned project of Israel. The iron dome formula that has been committed to the construction of the United States.
The report, written by Robert Soofer, former deputy secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Antimisile Defense Policy in the last Trump administration, highlights the risk of long -range attacks, adding intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). ) supplied with nuclear eyelets. The offensive that hits US territory is “real and growing. “
Soofer, writing for the Atlantic Council, recommends that the new Trump administration temporarily stockpile U. S. stockpiles of specific types of interceptor missiles to neutralize an imminent attack imaginable, rather than relying solely on the risk of retaliation to make sure countries like North Korea, China, or Russia don’t attack the continental United States.
Further down the line, the U.S. government should invest in space-based interceptors—a currently controversial topic—as well as directed-energy weapons now on the cusp of coming into use in various countries, Soofer says. Combined, an extra $4 or $5 billion should be plugged annually into the homeland missile defense chunk of the Missile Defense Agency’s annual budget, Soofer argues, on top of the $3 billion currently earmarked.
“In total, this would constitute approximately 1 of the defense budget for the number one national defense priority,” the report said.
Washington can retaliate against a country after attacking the United States, the report says, but it can only block a first strike by North Korea and only if it uses a few nuclear warheads.
Trump has pledged to “build an iron dome” over the United States to ensure that “nothing can damage our people”, but he has not said exactly how he plans to achieve it.
Contacted for further comment, the Trump transition team told Newsweek to refer back to previous comments made by the President-elect.
The Republican will stride back into the Oval Office on January 20 with the world a more dangerous place than during his first term, with nuclear saber-rattling rife and experimental ballistic missiles bringing fresh attention to how Washington plans to protect U.S. soil.
North Korea has continued its nuclear and missile progression systems, most likely driven by Russia, and the Moscow war in Ukraine has brought relations between Russia and the United States to its worst point since the end of the war. cold.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said in November Russia had fired an experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile at Ukraine. Authorities in Kyiv had initially categorized the weapon as the first use of an intercontinental ballistic missile in combat. Moscow also updated its nuclear doctrine as Ukraine marked 1,000 days of war with its neighbor, lowering the threshold the Kremlin needed to justify a nuclear strike.
In late November, North Korea’s Defense Ministry said the “provocations by the U. S. military” were likely to “plunge the regional scene into irreparable disaster. “Analysts expect Pyongyang to forge ahead with a complicated arsenal while building up more stockpiles of nuclear and traditional warheads.
As it stands, the U.S. does not have a joined-up system for intercepting large-scale ICBM strikes launched from Russia or China, although it would be able to take out the relatively small number of missiles that North Korea could fire at the U.S.
It would be a punctual attitude. The United States currently has 44 ground-based interceptors (GBIs) deployed in the country: 40 are in silos in Alaska and another four at Vandenberg Air Base in California as part of its medium-term ground defense formula.
Around 2028, the Pentagon will load 20 next interceptors of the next generation, to the GBI.
Anything lost through those interceptors would likely fall into the US navy’s AEGIS formula. AEGIS may eventually occupy a third of the United States at some point, SOOFER told Newsweek.
The Missile Defense Agency and U.S. Navy tested the SM-3 IIA missile against a mock incoming ICBM in November 2020. It fired SM-3 Block IIA missiles at the example ICBM.
Gen. Glen Vanherck, the former head of U. S. Northern Command (Northcom) and the U. S. -Canada North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) told lawmakers in March 2023 that he is “confident in our existing ability to protect the homeland opposed to a Limited People’s Republic [Democratic Republic of Korea, or North Korea] ballistic missile threat,” but “concerned about Capskill and the ability to respond. “It is “crucial” that the United States align the NGIS, he said at the time.
In the short term, the Trump management is building its stockpile of SM-3 Block IIA missiles, the report argues. Washington also spices up the number of GBIs available, Soofer says. Longer term, the United States is investing in area technology, adding area interceptors and reading about homing power guns like lasers, he adds.
The Pentagon and the U. S. Aerospace Defense Command, jointly led by the U. S. and Canada, declined to comment.
The Iron Dome, manufactured through the Israeli Rafael Public Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, designed to repel short-range rocket attacks, which are not the primary risk to the American homeland. Experts reject a similar conception for the United States, considering it impractical: Israel’s defenses are very different from those of the United States for several reasons, including the length of the country and the user it carries.
In a Phoenix rally in last in December, President -elect said that “he would lead our army to begin the structure of the wonderful Defense Shield of Iron Dome missiles, which will be done in the United States, much of that here In Arizona “.
Rep. Mike Waltz, a Florida Republican whom Trump tapped as his national security adviser, said earlier this month that “we want an Iron Dome for America. “
The proposals in his report, Soofer said, may just be a practical way to make the Iron Dome concept suitable for the U. S. If the U. S. Iron Dome is a euphemism for a more comprehensive defense, then the U. S. wishes more layers, he said.
But homeland missile defense has always had its critics. Some analysts argue it is too expensive, technologically difficult to predict what an enemy’s forces will look like decades down the line, and that it could undermine the idea of mutually assured destruction before triggering a new arms race.
According to Soofer, several scenarios are now ready for which the United States will have to be ready.
North Korea could launch a handful of missiles—deliberately or accidentally—and Russia or China combined, with their significant nuclear and conventional arsenals, could carry out an overwhelming attack on the U.S.
Experts say that a North Korean attack would be very different from the way Russia or China would fight the American pyongyang, although warmithicosis, it is preserved through their existing actions, but an attack against Beijing or Moscow, or both, half or thousands of Thousands of the Ballistic and Cruise missiles, as well as weapons and electromagnetic intermediation, said William Alberque, a stop in the inventory market at the Henry L. Stimson and former director of the Arms Control Center, NATO Disarmament and not proliferation.
“The staircase would be crazy,” and beyond North Korea’s capabilities at the moment, Alberque told Newsweek.
But Beijing and Moscow can also decide to attack the United States with a limited strike to “coercion” the Washington report, S SOOFER. This type of operation would be designed for the United States to move away from a fight or refuse to an ally, but not make Washington use its nuclear weapons or establish a large -scale reprisal attack.
The defense organization in the United Kingdom, the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), argued last year that enemies of the United States can use limited nuclear or traditional strikes, that the U. S. strait is very ready to repel frightening but not to infuriate Washington. “
Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping “believe that such” coercive “attacks can deter the United States from protecting their allies,” said the reflected image group.
A key part of the U.S.’s nuclear and broader military strategy relies on America’s allies believing Washington will come to their aid, should they be attacked.
Beijing or Moscow could also hit the U.S.’s nuclear forces and command centers to stop overwhelming nuclear retaliation, according to Soofer’s report. This means missiles should protect key bases and forces that the U.S. would use to strike back, it suggests.
The report states that missile defenses do not focus on “absolute cover for the American people,” but they do ensure that Russia or Chinese officials doubt that the kind of attack they can simply mount will succeed.
The GBIs, single-handedly protecting the U.S. homeland, should be integrated with the SM-3 missiles, plus the interceptors fired by THAAD, and all the associated technology like radars, according to the report.
The United States also wants more SM-3 missiles and build production, says SOOFER. The United States recently builds around 12 of the last versions of the SM-3 year, but it can probably be double, says SOFER.
Thaad’s systems helped Iran’s ballistic missiles in their two waves of attacks on Israel in April and October of this year. This missile comes with a label of approximately $ 25 million, or a quarter of each GBI, a much more competent and long -range long range. and complex missile.
The U.S. is already developing the NGI, with defense giant Lockheed Martin chosen to carry through the development of the interceptor, touted by the manufacturer as a missile that “will revolutionize U.S. homeland missile defense.” It is specifically designed to shield U.S. soil from intercontinental ballistic missiles from Iran and North Korea, Lockheed Martin said.
The GBI intercept an ICBM in the middle of their flight, when the incoming missiles are out of the doors of the atmosphere, while the Aegis or Thaad missiles run like an ICBM descends.
But the more an ICBM can be eliminated, the more the defense faces.
At this level of its trip, the missile moves slower, it is less difficult to stumble due to its heat signature, and the eye has still separated from the release vehicle.
There are several ways to target an ICBM that will become a threat to U.S. soil before an SM-3 or GBI can get to it. Knocking out a missile in the earliest stage of its launch is known as boost phase missile defense and should be on the table, says Soofer.
One school of thought would be to have fighter jets hovering close to the launch site to intercept it, or drones and lasers in a similar position, but this could only really work against North Korea or Iran.
Another possibility is what South Korea has been quietly developing. In the past few years, Seoul has set out a strategy made up of several parts, including preemptive strikes on North Korea’s nuclear and broader missile facilities if there are signs its northern neighbor is intending to use them, known as “kill chain.”
South Korea then has its antimisible defense formula and Korea air to intercept attacks, twinned with their great punishment plan and reprisals in Korea (KMPR). It is a stenography for precision movements or to use commands for senior North Korean officials and important command centers.
The air defense network, such as the KMPR, are the sword and Seoul shield, Alberque said.
Washington’s policy is “to move forward with the risk of long -term North Korea through an antimile defense strategy in layers combined with offensive measures to save it before they occur,” SOOFER writes.
“South Korea is building a preemptive conventional capability to defeat a nuclear armed foe,” Alberque said. “We should probably be working with South Korea on that.”
“They’re building an exquisite set of left of launch systems,” Alberque said. Left of launch means taking action to stop an enemy attack before they can carry out their plans.
Another option is to launch array interceptor missiles. It would be a key detail for an American iron dome, says Soofer, arguing that the armament is now inevitable.
The president -elect is also thinking that yes. Trump said at the Arizona rally that “Ronald Reagan sought to do it many years ago, but they had no technology. “
“But now you have it, you can hit a needle from the sky,” he added.
Reagan, the Republican President who controlled Washington in the 1980s while ending the Cold War, promoted to what he called the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), nicknamed “Star Wars. “
Reagan intended for SDI, partly in space, to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles introduced through the Soviet Union at the time at other times in the missile’s flight.
The likes of SM-3 and GBI would be enough to defeat a limited stockpile of North Korean ICBMs, Soofer said. But opposed to Russia or China, he said, space interceptors would be the only way to combat the ICBM risk they pose.
If Russia chose to unleash attacks against the United States, Washington may face more than 1,000 warheads on its soil and specifically its strategic nuclear forces. A technique for Méli-Mélo to preserve herself opposite this, and the assets the U. S. would use to retaliate, simply won’t be enough, Soofer says.
Soofer suggests the Pentagon must place “more emphasis on investing in future, revolutionary capabilities, such as space sensors, SBIs [space-based interceptors], and non-kinetic options (such as directed energy) to outpace adversary capability development.”
The support of the detection and identity of the threats of the sensors in the satellites that is recently evolving can simply “improve considerably” the way in which the United States can sift the genuine legs of the lures next decade, Soofer said.
Others are skeptical. ” Once you start putting the systems in the area, it never stops,” Alberque said. “So the Russians put systems in the area, China puts the systems in the area, [so] China and Russia their ability to destroy your area. , so you must have bigger things to destroy their area. “
It is imaginable to forge a complete defense opposed to Russian or North Korean missiles as they exist today, Alberque said.
“But when you build it, North Korea’s missiles won’t be where they are today,” he added. “They’ll be where they are in 10 years, or even need to be built, and at that point, they’ll see that you’re doing this, and they’ll build systems designed to defeat what you build
“The problem is, you’re still waiting for the disaster to happen,” Alberque said. “It’s such a Band-Aid approach.”
Russia and China are building their own opposite defenses to the long -range cruise and ballistic missiles, according to the report. “The defense opposed to the ICBM of the USA Army balance in safe situations, complicating the limited options of the United States, “SOFER argues.
The paintings of Moscow and Beijing in combination in early alert satellites, and the use of Russia’s domination in air defense has combined the experience in the Chinese area, Alberque said.
Russia’s S-500 air defense system, the next iteration in its long-running line of advanced, ground-based air defense systems, is not just about intercepting high-flying aircraft but also about missiles and protecting space, Alberque said. Moscow is also developing the Nudol, or A-235 PL-19, a system designed to stop ballistic missiles and counter satellites, as well as new ways to dazzle enemy satellites in space.
China “builds new large offensive capabilities with the end of limited missile defenses in the United States, and constitutes other special capabilities to destroy US antimile defense capabilities so that we cannot protect ourselves against what this is not either,” he said Hostel.
“They are creating a formula that will make it much more complicated for the United States to aim and achieve the Russian and Chinese objectives,” said Alberque. “They have won the message and are construction defenses,” he added, but under pressure that the pressure that those defenses concentrate on shielding their army commanders and nuclear centers, that population centers and primary cities.
“We’re in an arms race,” Alberque said. “Not at first. “
Ellie Cook is a London-based Newsweek security and defense journalist in the United Kingdom, her paintings are largely aimed at the Russo-Ukrainian War, the U. S. military, weapons systems, and the emerging generation. She joined Newsweek in January 2023, after running as a Daily Express journalist, and graduated from the University of London with a degree in foreign journalism in City. Languages: English, Spanish. You can succeed in Ellie by emailing e. cook@newsweek. com.