House subcommittee debates ‘Golden Dome’ policy shift and risks to strategic stability

At a House Armed Services Committee Strategic Forces Subcommittee hearing, lawmakers and Defense Department witnesses debated the administration’s “Golden Dome for America” executive order and whether a comprehensive homeland missile‑defense architecture would strengthen or undermine strategic stability.

The issue moved quickly from technical design to policy risk. Ranking Member Seth Moulton warned that Golden Dome “completely upends” the longstanding U.S. reliance on nuclear deterrence and urged the committee to ask whether expanded missile defenses might increase incentives for an adversary to strike first. “More missile defense is not necessarily better if it upsets strategic stability,” Moulton said. He added that the committee must weigh “how will expanding U.S. missile defense today impact our strategic stability tomorrow?”

Why it matters: The debate ties a large potential…