The Golden Dome Dilemma:, A shield or catalyst for Global instability?

The recent announcement of the United States’ “ Golden Dome” missile defence initiative has elicited serious concerns from the international community, particularly from the People’s Republic of China.

Valued at approximately $175 billion, the Golden Dome represents a significant evolution in US defence strategy. It proposed a fully integrated, space-based AI-driven network capable of intercepting a wide range of missiles, including ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missiles.

While US officials have emphasised its defensive nature, China has strongly criticised the initiative, asserting that it carries “ strong offensive implications” and risks accelerating the militarisation of outer space. Such a system disrupts the delicate balance of strategic deterrence by potentially rendering nuclear arsenals ineffective, thereby encouraging rival states to expand or modernise their own missile capabilities in response.

This development raises important legal and geopolitical implications.

Although the Golden Dome does not directly violate existing arms control treaties, it arguably undermines the spirit of several international frameworks. Notably, it challenges the objectives of the “ Hague Code of Conduct” (HCOC), which seeks to prevent the proliferation of ballistic missile technology, and it may contravene the principles of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which prohibits the placement of weapons in orbit and calls for the peaceful use of outer space.

Furthermore, by eroding the principle of mutual vulnerabilities, a foundational concept underpinning strategic arms reduction treaties such as “New START”,_ the Golden Dome risks destabilising long–standing nuclear deterrence arrangements.

From an alternative perspective, the deployment of such a system will not only threaten the national security of rival states but may also infringe the sovereignty of China’s sensitive regions like the South China Sea & the Taiwan Strait. The ability of the United States to project surveillance globally would be perceived as a strategic overreach, which may heighten tensions and reduce the likelihood of Cooperative arms control dialogue.

In essence, the golden dome may be designed as a shield; its broader implications suggest the potential to act as a catalyst for a new era of arms conflict insecurities, extended to the terrestrial boundaries of outer space.

In the coming annexes of conflict the international community would perhaps face a critical juncture, whether to pursue unilateral tech dominance or reaffirm collective security via diplomacy, restraint, mediation and multilateral engagement