WASHINGTON (FN) — President Donald Trump’s announcement of a new class of U.S. Navy battleships, the so‑called “Trump‑class” vessels has ignited fierce debate across military circles, Congress, and the international community. Branded as part of a “Golden Fleet,” the ships are promised to be the largest and most powerful surface combatants since World War II, equipped with nuclear cruise missiles, hypersonic weapons, and artificial intelligence.
Supporters argue the plan could restore America’s naval dominance at a time when China and Russia are expanding their maritime reach. “This is about projecting strength,” one defense hawk told reporters. “The world needs to know the United States is back in charge at sea.”
But critics see something else entirely: nostalgia dressed up as strategy. “Battleships were retired for a reason,” said a former Pentagon official. “They’re vulnerable in modern warfare, and pouring billions into them risks repeating the mistakes of the past.”
The first ship, to be named USS Defiant, is slated to begin construction later this decade, funded in part by a 26 billion dollars defense bill passed in December. Trump has claimed the vessels will be “100 times more powerful” than the legendary Iowa‑class battleships, though experts question the feasibility of such sweeping promises.
International reaction has been mixed. Chinese state media dismissed the plan as “a vanity project,” while Russian commentators warned it could trigger a new arms race at sea. NATO allies, meanwhile, are quietly asking whether the U.S. is investing in the right kind of deterrence, given the rise of drones, cyber warfare, and precision missiles.
The controversy underscores a larger question: is Trump’s battleship plan a bold vision for the future of naval warfare, or a costly monument to a bygone era? For some, the answer lies in whether the ships ever leave the drawing board. For others, the mere announcement has already reshaped the conversation about America’s role on the world’s oceans.
