Senior DoD space officials on Tuesday said Golden Dome will provide increased deterrence against the growing capabilities of near-peer adversaries such as China, while promoting peace through strength.
But some Democrats wondered: Will it actually just be a really expensive opening volley in a new arms race?
Build up: Air Force Secretary Troy Meink told members of the House Armed Services Committee that he believes the missile defense system ordered by a Trump administration executive order will reduce the chance of a missile attack by Russia or China.
However, Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the top Democrat on the panel, worried it could be “incredibly destabilizing” without a solid strategy. And Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) predicted it would actually increase the risk of conflict.
“It would be helpful to…understand how our adversaries are going to respond because a more logical response would be for them to develop ways to get around Golden Dome,” he said. “If we’re going to put something up in the sky for $500 billion and it just starts an arms race and then it doesn’t work because they can get around it, then that’s a massive waste of taxpayer dollars.”
Around the world: China has expressed its own worries that Golden Dome could kick off an arms race, and said it believes putting interceptors in orbit is a violation of the Outer Space Treaty.
Russia and North Korea have also both been critical of the project, saying it threatens global strategic stability.
Something is missing here: The wide ranging hearing touched on several fiscal 2026 priorities, including:
- Support for DoD’s space acquisition workforce;
- The need to boost US launch capacity;
- The location of US Space Command (spoiler: Colorado reps want it to stay in Colorado);
- The military’s recent success in tactically responsive launch.
However, one big thing was missing: a full budget. And members on both sides of the aisle weren’t shy about expressing their displeasure about the delay.
“If we don’t get [the administration’s budget proposal], we’re going to write [appropriations bills] without it,” Rep. Michael Rogers (R-AL), the chair of the committee, said.
