日本語
한국어
Tiếng Việt
简体中文
President Trump’s ambitious “Golden Dome” missile defense plan, designed to shield the United States from nuclear threats, is encountering significant skepticism from the scientific community. Announced on May 20th with a projected cost of $175 billion, the system aims to be operational before the end of Trump’s term, but experts question its feasibility.
The Challenge of Interception
While the U.S. already has a missile defense system targeting limited ICBM attacks, a recent American Physical Society (APS) report suggests its effectiveness is uncertain, even against small-scale threats. The “Golden Dome” seeks to defend against more advanced adversaries like Russia and China, incorporating hypersonic weapons and advanced cruise missiles, raising the stakes significantly.
Physicist Frederick Lamb, chair of the APS report, emphasized the extreme difficulty of reliably intercepting nuclear-armed ICBMs. He stated that no existing system has demonstrated this capability.
Space-Based Defense: A Complex Solution
A key element of the “Golden Dome” involves space-based interceptors designed to neutralize missiles during their boost phase. While proponents cite lower launch costs as making this feasible, critics argue that the sheer number of interceptors needed for comprehensive coverage is astronomical.
The APS report estimates that defending against even a single North Korean ICBM would require over 1,000 interceptors in orbit. Protection against larger attacks could demand tens of thousands.
Countermeasures and Technological Hurdles
Beyond the sheer scale, intercepting missiles mid-course presents challenges due to potential countermeasures like decoys. In space, distinguishing warheads from debris is incredibly difficult, making reliable interception a “huge technical challenge.”
Victoria Samson of the Secure World Foundation highlights that while technology has advanced, “the laws of physics have not changed, and that’s really what the challenge is.”
Cost and Feasibility
Experts like Thomas González Roberts of Georgia Tech question the feasibility of creating a comprehensive system for $175 billion within three years, especially one capable of intercepting missiles launched from any location.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that a space-based system alone could cost between $161 billion and $542 billion over 20 years.
The Debate Continues
Despite skepticism, proponents like Tom Karako of the Center for Strategic and International Studies see value in prioritizing missile defense. Robert Peters of the Heritage Foundation believes space-based defense is closer than many recognize.
The Missile Defense Agency disputes the APS study, claiming it relies on outdated data and doesn’t reflect recent system improvements. However, critics argue that the fundamental physics challenges remain.
The “Golden Dome” plan sparks a crucial debate about the future of missile defense, balancing ambition with the realities of physics and the escalating costs of national security.
Keywords: Missile Defense, Golden Dome, Donald Trump, ICBM, Nuclear Threat, Physics, Space-Based Interceptors, American Physical Society, National Security