The recent proliferation of strategic ballistic missile defenses poses a serious problem to the strategic stability between the great powers. The expanding deployment of these systems has inspired a great debate among defense academics. The United States has spent billions on developing a wide range of missile defenses, and Russia and China have responded to their deployment by increasing their weapons development momentum. Russia in particular is pursuing unconventional systems like the Status-6 nuclear torpedo in order to circumvent missile defenses. Much doubt has been expressed about the demonstrated accuracy of missile defenses and how much strategic value they provide. Although these systems do not work as advertised, they can still upset the global arms control framework of the last half century by undermining the mutual vulnerability that ensures mutual deterrence functions. This literature review examines the current academic discourse on missile defense to evaluate the consequences of the United States’ current course of action and predict the future stability of the deterrence. A majority of expert opinion has settled on missile defenses being destabilizing influences on deterrence relationships, and some have gone further by saying that missile defense represents an American intention to achieve nuclear primacy. The continuing advancement of missile defenses could potentially lead to an arms race scenario heralding a return to Cold War tensions, or even war, while providing staggeringly little security for the United States.