The U.S. is not prepared enough for a possible long-range missile strike from Russia, China or North Korea, a new report seen by Newsweek says, offering one potential road map for President-elect Donald Trump to piece together the American version of Israel’s vaunted Iron Dome system he has pledged to build around the U.S.
The report, written by Robert Sofer, former Deputy Secretary of Defense for the Policy of Nuclear Defense and Antimisiles in the last Trump administration, highlights the risk of long -range attacks, adding intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) with nuclear eyelets, which hit the The US territory is “real and growing. “
SOOFER, in an article for the Atlantic Council, recommends that the incoming administration of Trump temporarily reinforce the American stocks of express types of interceptors to eliminate a possible incoming attack, instead of depending solely on the risk of reprisals to ensure that North North , China or Russia do it. Do not attack the American continent
Over time, the United States government deserves to invest in space interceptors (a lately debatable option) as well as in directed energy weapons, which will lately be used in other countries, says Soofer. A total of another 4,000 or 5,000 million dollars would have to be injected each year in the domestic antimile defense part of the annual budget of the missile defense agency, SOOFER said, most of the 3 billion dollars recently planned.
“Combined, this would amount to about 1 percent of the defense budget for the number 1 national defense priority,” the report says.
Washington can hit back at another country after they strike the U.S., the report argues, but it can only effectively block a first hit from North Korea and only if it uses a few warheads.
Trump has pledged to “build an Iron Dome” over the U.S. to ensure that “nothing can come and harm our people” but hasn’t laid out precisely how he plans to achieve this.
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 advanced with its nuclear and missile progression systems, which were introduced through 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 cold war.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said in November that Russia had fired an experimental intermediate-range ballistic missile at Ukraine. First, kyiv authorities classified the weapon as the first use of an ICBM 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.
Last November, North Korea’s Defense Ministry said that “provocations by the U. S. military” risked “plunging the regional situation into an irreparable catastrophe. “Analysts expect Pyongyang to move forward with a complicated arsenal while building more arsenals of traditional and nuclear weapons. Warheads.
In the existing state of affairs, the United States does not have a united formula for intercepting large-scale ICBM movements introduced in Russia or China, it can eliminate the relatively low number of missiles that North Korea can attract to the United in the United States of the United States
It would be an ad hoc approach. The U. S. recently has 44 floor interceptors (GBIs) deployed from the country—40 of which are in silos in Alaska, with another 4 at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California as a component of its mid-floor defense formula.
Around 2028, the Pentagon will add 20 Next Generation Interceptors, or NGIs, to the 44 GBIs.
Whatever is missed by these interceptors would likely fall to the U.S. Navy’s Aegis system. Aegis can protect around a third of the U.S. at a given time, Soofer told Newsweek.
The US Missile Defense Agency and the Navy tested the SM-3 IIA missile opposed to an incoming simulated ICBM in November 2020. They fired SM-3 Block IIA missiles at ICBMS.
General Glen Vanherck, the former leader of the US Northern Command (Northcom) and the US-Canada North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) (NORAD) to lawmakers in March 2023 that “is confident in our existing ability to protect the homeland opposed to a DPR from a limited DPRK. [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, or North Korea] ballistic missile threat, “but “concerned about long-lasting capability and ability to respond. ” It is “crucial” for the United States to box the NGIS, he said at the time.
In the short term, the Trump administration is expected to accumulate its SM-3 IIA missile actions, according to the report. Washington also builds the amount of GBI available, says Soofer. In the long term, the United States is expected to invest in area technology, add area interceptors and hunting in power guns as a laser, he adds.
The Pentagon and the North American Aerospace Defense Command, jointly run through the United States and Canada, declined to comment.
The Iron Dome, manufactured through Israeli-owned Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, is designed to repel short-range rocket attacks, which is not the number one risk to the US territory. Experts reject an analogous design for the United States as impractical: Israel’s defenses are very different from those of the United States for several reasons besides the length of the country and who is attacking.
In a Phoenix rally in late December, the President-elect said he will “direct our military to begin construction of the great Iron Dome missile defense shield, which will be made all in the USA, much of it right here in Arizona.”
Rep. Mike Waltz, a Florida Republican whom Trump leveraged as national security adviser, said earlier this month that “we want an iron dome for America. “
The proposals contained in his report, Soofer said, may be only a practical means of adapting the Iron Dome concept in the United States. If the U. S. Iron Dome is a euphemism for a more comprehensive defense, then the U. S. wants more diapers, he said.
But the antimisile defense of the birthplace has had its criticisms. Some analysts argue that it is too expensive and technologically complicated to wait decades of how the forces of an enemy will see, and that this could undermine the concept of safe mutual destruction before triggering a new arms race.
According to Soofer, several scenarios are now in place 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 to how Russia or China would resolve to battle the U.S. Pyongyang, although bellicose, is restrained by its current stocks, but an attack from Beijing or Moscow—or both—would involve hundreds or thousands of ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as electromagnetic weapons and jamming, said William Alberque, a visiting fellow at the Henry L. Stimson Center and a former director of NATO’s Arms Control, Disarmament and WMD Non-Proliferation Center.
“The scale would be crazy,” and it would be beyond North Korea’s functions at this point, Alberque told Newsweek.
But Beijing and Moscow may also decide to attack the United States with a limited strike to “coerce” Washington’s S Soofer report. This type of operation would be designed to make the United States withdraw from combat or deny an ally, but not cause Washington to use its nuclear weapons or mount a large-scale retaliatory strike.
The UK-based defense think tank, the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), argued last year that enemies of the United States may resort to limited nuclear or traditional strikes, which the United States is not prepared to defend themselves “in an effort to scare yet irritating Washington ».
Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping “believe that such ‘coercive’ measures can simply deter the United States from protecting their allies,” said the group of experts.
A key detail of the Nuclear Army’s strategy and broader in the United States is in the American allies who believe that Washington will come to their aid, if they were attacked.
Beijing or Moscow can also hit the nuclear forces and nuclear centers of the USA to prevent overwhelming nuclear reprisals, according to the SOFER report. That means that missiles protect the basis and key forces that the United States would use to fight, suggests.
The report says that antimisile defenses do not concentrate on an “absolute coverage for the American people”, but they do ensure that Russia or Chinese officials doubt that the type of attack they could mount will be successful.
According to the report, the Gbis, which are the only ones protecting US territory, will be incorporated into the SM-3 missiles, as well as the interceptors dragged through Thaad, and all related technologies, such as radars.
The United States also wants more SM-3 missiles and increased production, Soofer says. The U. S. recently builds about 12 of the year’s newest SM-3 edition, however, it can probably do twice as much, Soofer says.
Thaad Systems helped Iran’s ballistic missiles in their two waves of attacks on Israel in April and October of this year. Each missile comes with a label of around $ 25 million, or a quarter of each GBI, a much more capable, long -range and complex missile.
The United States is already arriving at the NGI, with the defense giant Lockheed Martin selected to highlight the progression of the interceptor, presented through the manufacturer as a missile that “will revolutionize the defense of American missiles. ” It is in particular designed for American soil of intercontinental ballistic missiles of Iran and North Korea, said Lockheed Martin.
GBIS intercepts a half-flight ICBM, when incoming missiles are outside the gates of the atmosphere, while Aegis missiles or missiles are an ICBM descend.
But the faster an intercontinental ballistic missile can be neutralized, the greater the defense that opposes it.
At this point in its journey, the missile is moving more slowly, is less difficult to trip over due to its warmth, and the warhead has still separated from the launch 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.
An idea school would be for combat airplanes to loom near the launch site to intercept it, or drones and lasers in a similar position, however, that can only paints opposed to North Korea or Iran.
Another is that South Korea is developing quietly. In recent years, Seoul has established a multi-pronged strategy, adding preemptive moves opposed to North Korea’s nuclear and missile comforts if there are symptoms that its northern neighbor intends to use them, known, known. as the “chain of destruction”.
South Korea then has its Korean air and missile defense formula to intercept attacks, along with its Korean mass punishment and retaliation (KMPR) plan. This is shorthand for precision movements or commands to eliminate senior North Korean officials and important command centers.
The air defense network, such as KMPR, is Seoul’s sword and shield, Alberque said.
Washington’s policy will be “to stay ahead of the North Korean risk in the long term thanks to an anti-missile defense strategy combined with offensive measures to prevent launches before they occur,” Soofer said.
“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 are building an exquisite set of liberation systems of the left,” Alberque said. To the left of the liberation taking steps to prevent an enemy attack before he can get his plans out.
Another option is to launch array interceptors would be a key detail for an American iron dome, says Soofer, saying that the militarization of is now inevitable.
The president-elect also happens to think so. Trump said at the Arizona Rally that “Ronald Reagan sought to do it many years ago, but they didn’t have technology. “
“But now they have it, you can hit a needle of the sky,” he added.
Reagan, the Republican president who stewarded Washington through the 1980s while the Cold War drew to an end, pushed for what he termed the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), popularly dubbed “Star Wars.”
Reagan intended for SDI, partly based in space, to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles introduced through the Soviet Union at the time in issues on the missile’s flight.
The likes of SM-3 and GBIs would be enough to defeat a relatively limited North Korean ICBM stockpile, Soofer said. But against Russia or China, he said, space-based interceptors would be the only way to tackle the ICBM threat they pose.
If Russia decides to launch attacks against the United States, Washington could find itself facing more than 1,000 nuclear warheads aimed at its soil and, in particular, against its strategic nuclear forces. A patchwork strategy to guard against this and protect the resources the United States would use to retaliate probably wouldn’t be enough, Soofer says.
Soofer suggests the Pentagon will need to “further emphasize investing in long-term game-changing capabilities such as area sensors, SBIs [area-founded interceptors], and non-kinetic features (such as directed power) to advance the progression. ” of the adversary’s capabilities. “
Supporting threat detection and identity from sensors on newly evolving satellites can “significantly improve” how the United States can sift genuine warheads from decoys over the next decade, Soofer says.
Others are skeptical. “Once you start installing systems in the area, it never stops,” said Alberque. “Then the Russians installed systems in the area, China installed systems in the area, [then] China and Russia intensified their ability to destroy their area assets, so you want to have a greater device to destroy their area. “
It is imaginable to create a whole defense against Russian or North Korean missiles as they exist today, Alberque said.
“But as long as they are built, North Korean missiles will no longer be where they are today,” he added. “They’ll be where they are 10 years from now, or however long it takes to build them, and at that point, they’ll see that you’re doing that, and therefore they’ll build systems designed to defeat what you’re building.
“The challenge is that you are waiting for the crisis to happen,” Alberque said. “It’s a band-aid approach. “
Russia and China are either their own defenses opposed to long-range cruisers and ballistic missiles, the report said. “Defense opposed to ICBMs and cruise missiles in the United States may supply asymmetric to Russia and China, because an expansion of Russian and Chinese air defenses and missiles will likely have an effect on the balance of the military in some situations, complicating limited U. S. options. , Soofer says.
The paintings of Moscow and Beijing in combination in early caution satellites and use the Russian domain in air defense combined with the experience in the Chinese area, Alberque said.
The Russian S-500 air defense formula, the next version of its long line of complex ground air defense formulas, is intended solely to intercept high-flying aircraft, but also to provide cover from missiles and space, Alberque said. Moscow is also considering the Nudol, or A-235 PL-19, a formula designed to thwart ballistic missiles and countersatellites, as well as new tactics to dazzle enemy satellites in space.
China “builds new large offensive abilities to pass beyond the limited antimile defenses of the United States, and builds other special capabilities to destroy US antimile defense capacities so that we can protect ourselves from anything,” Alberque said.
“They create a formula that will become much more complicated for the United States to sign up and succeed in the Russian and Chinese objectives,” said Alberque. “Or they understood the message and build defenses,” he added, but under pressure that these defenses are concentrated in protectors of their army commanders and nuclear centers, that population centers and large cities.
“We’re in the middle of an arms race,” Alberque said. “Not at the start.”
Ellie Cook is a Newsweek security and defense journalist founded in London in the United Kingdom, her paintings are largely aimed at the Russian-Ukraine war, the US army, weapons systems and emerging generation. He joined Newsweek in January 2023, after running such a journalist from Daily Express, and graduated from foreign journalism in City, at the University of London. Languages: English, Spanish. You can succeed in Ellie by email to e. cook@newsweek. com.