IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/defpea/v36y2025i2p141-166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forecasting Costs of U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense Against a Major Nuclear Strike

Author

Listed:
  • Igor Moric
  • Timur Kadyshev

Abstract

How many dollars would the United States need to spend on its ballistic missile defense (BMD) for each dollar the attacker spends to launch land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) armed with nuclear warheads? A hypothetical scenario is analyzed in which the United States has a functioning BMD technology and enough interceptors to distribute them in a two-layer defense with the overall system efficiency of 90%, as targeted by U.S. war planners. It is assumed that the attacker has enough missiles to deliver a range between 500 and 6000 warheads to the continental United States. Results show that in the most optimistic case for the defender, with a very high individual interceptor kill effectiveness of 90% and with perfect decoy discrimination capability, the United States would need to spend on average 8 times more than the attacker, for a total cost between $60 billion and $500 billion. With a more realistic individual interceptor effectiveness of 50% and if the system is unable to discriminate against decoys, the United States would need to spend on average 70 times more, for a total cost between $430 billion and $5.3 trillion.

Suggested Citation

  • Igor Moric & Timur Kadyshev, 2025. "Forecasting Costs of U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense Against a Major Nuclear Strike," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(2), pages 141-166, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:defpea:v:36:y:2025:i:2:p:141-166
    DOI: 10.1080/10242694.2024.2396415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10242694.2024.2396415
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10242694.2024.2396415?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:defpea:v:36:y:2025:i:2:p:141-166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GDPE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.