Mackenzie Knight, a senior research associate for the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, has called on President Donald Trump to cancel the United States Air Force’s Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program.

Knight, whose expertise includes global nuclear forces and the role of nuclear weapons, made her case in a detailed article published by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

Citing significant cost overruns and delays, Knight characterized the Sentinel program as a prime example of wasteful government spending.

“The extreme cost and schedule overruns of the Sentinel ICBM program highlight the need to address the future of our country’s ICBM force and present an opportunity for curtailing wasteful spending,” she wrote.

Sentinel ICBM Program: A Troubled History

The Sentinel program, which aims to replace the aging Minuteman III ICBMs, has faced growing scrutiny due to its ballooning costs and delays. In January 2024, the program breached the Nunn-McCurdy Act after exceeding its budget by 37 percent, prompting congressional notification.

By mid-2024, the Defense Department revised its cost estimate to $140.9 billion—an 81 percent increase over earlier projections—and acknowledged a three-year delay.

Critics, including Knight, attribute the program’s struggles to flawed assumptions, mismanagement, and the sole-source contract awarded to Northrop Grumman.

The company was left unchallenged after Boeing withdrew from the bid, citing an uneven playing field.

Alternatives to Sentinel

Knight outlined several alternatives to the Sentinel program, ranging from incremental adjustments to complete program cancellation.

• Option 1: Reopen portions of the Sentinel contract for competitive bids and extend the life of some Minuteman III missiles. This would slightly delay Sentinel deployment but could reduce costs.
• Option 2: Reduce the deployed ICBM force to 300, significantly lowering procurement, operation, and maintenance expenses.
• Option 3: Cancel the Sentinel program altogether while life-extending the Minuteman III missiles to maintain a smaller ICBM force.
• Option 4: Eliminate ICBMs entirely from the U.S. nuclear arsenal, relying instead on ballistic missile submarines and heavy bombers.

Knight emphasized that a smaller or even non-existent ICBM force would not compromise U.S. strategic security.

She pointed to government evaluations suggesting that ballistic missile submarines are highly reliable and virtually undetectable, making ICBMs redundant in modern deterrence. Moreover, ICBMs’ inability to be recalled once launched presents unique risks.

From a fiscal perspective, Knight argued that the $141 billion cost of the Sentinel program would be better spent on more urgent priorities, such as education or infrastructure.

She echoed concerns raised by New Jersey Democrat Lisa McCormick, about the disproportionate share of taxpayer dollars spent on defense contractors.

“Last year, the average American taxpayer paid $5,009 in income taxes to fund weapons for war and a large share of those funds – $1,748 – went directly to weapons contractors,” said McCormick, who noted that’s well over 35% of the average tax bill. “When Americans are filing their tax returns, they should know where their tax dollars really go.”

“The $1,748 a typical family gave to Pentagon contractors is more than the average monthly rent in the United States, which was around $1,554 as of January 2025.” “Just like our personal expenses, our income tax payments can change our lives for the better — or not,” said McCormick.

“If we invest in education, we’ll see families benefit as their children are more prosperous in life,” said McCormick. “If we waste more on Pentagon contracts, their CEOs and shareholders be richer — and we’ll see U.S. weapons used to inflict death and destruction around the world.”

Recommended Action

Knight endorsed Option 3, calling for the cancellation of the Sentinel program and the life extension of Minuteman III missiles. She described this approach as the most feasible and cost-effective, balancing the need for strategic security with the imperative to reduce wasteful spending.

“The Sentinel program’s cost and schedule challenges have become untenable and unacceptable for U.S. taxpayers,” Knight concluded. “We must prioritize government efficiency by slashing wasteful spending and streamlining modernization programs.”

The Sentinel program, once hailed as a critical element of U.S. nuclear modernization, now faces mounting pressure from experts and fiscal watchdogs. Whether the administration will heed calls to curtail or cancel the program remains uncertain.