U.S. President Donald Trump gestures at Ocala International Airport in Ocala, Florida, U.S., May 1, 2026. REUTERS/Nathan Howard
In December 2025, President Donald Trump announced that a World War 2-era battleship would be back in use. But defense technology has changed considerably since that war, which ended 81 years ago in 1945. And according to analysis from the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, the "Trump-class battleship" doesn't meet the needs of 21st Century defense and warfare and is absolute technologically.
Fortune's Jake Angelo, in an article published on May 3, explains, "Here's the issue: the U.S. Navy hasn't operated a battleship since the last Iowa-class vessel was retired in 1992 — a type of vessel which hasn't even been constructed since the mid-20th Century. The Trump-class battleship, which the Department of Defense is requesting upwards of $1 billion to build, will inherently be stuck in WW2, and would be rendered helpless against modern-day weapons. In fact, despite the billion-dollar price tag, Cato puts the true cost at $20 billion apiece, and it still won't be able to subvert modern-day, advanced anti-ship missiles."
Cato policy analyst Ben Giltner believes that the U.S. Department of Defense should rule out using the battleship that Trump is promoting.
Giltner told Fortune, "We haven't used this since World War 2, because the aircraft was able to pick it off in the ocean."
Giltner, according to Angelo, "said this type of ship shouldn't even be on the Defense Department's list: it’s not an aircraft carrier, meaning it can't carry jets or other supplies."
"Giltner said Cato's estimated $20 billion price tag on a single battleship is a conservative estimate, one which only takes into account the acquisition and procurement of the vessel," Angelo reports. "That estimate, Giltner said, fails to take into account the long-term expenses associated with the standard upkeep of a ship and for specialized training required for ship crew. Instead of adding to the debt, Giltner said that opting to pay down the debt would be a better allocation of tax dollars."
Giltner is sounding the alarm about the United States' national debt, warning that using the defense budget carelessly will greatly add to it.
The Cato analyst told Fortune, "We could be doing something even as simple as helping to pay down the debt, the interest on the debt right now, which is absolutely enormous."