Follow us on social

Shutterstock_640283920-scaled-e1641332560191

Another gratuitous defense budget highlights absurdity in US priorities

Throwing more billions of dollars at the Pentagon (that it didn’t even ask for) won’t do anything to vaccinate the world from COVID-19.

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex

While we were cursing the old year and steeling ourselves for the new, the status quo was replicating itself last week when President Biden signed a record-high $778 billion National Defense Authorization Act into law, preserving the new weapons programs of the Trump era and going well beyond even the administration’s initial request of $715 billion.

The U.S. defense industry has come to seem like part of the scenery — an unshakeable force on the global economic and political scene. A vote against the NDAA by a member of Congress, in terms of its actual prospects for effecting change in U.S. policy, remains purely symbolic. The inability of legislators to mount even a moderate challenge to the power of defense companies to determine U.S. policy should be absolutely chilling to anybody who believes that the most consequential problems of human society can be addressed by changing policy. For a body whose members receive tens of millions of dollars in contributions from the defense industry every year, there can be no deviation from this, the most well-funded bipartisan consensus.

The familiar refrain is that the defense industry is a jobs program — the only such program that consistently receives substantial federal funding, despite clear evidence that it is among the worst industries at creating jobs.

The consensus that places funding the military above any other policy priority exists independent from any assessment of actual defense needs, too. The United States has shown that it can make the most and the biggest planes and bombs, but it cannot or will not address a pandemic that — in its scope, effects, and the demands it places on U.S. healthcare facilities —resembles the possible consequences of a biological or chemical weapon. 

U.S. companies rapidly produced the COVID vaccine and treatments by putting public money toward a record jump in private profits. But without making the vaccine available for manufacture elsewhere in the world by breaking the patents held by these companies, the administration doomed its own efforts to control the pandemic and showed its unwillingness, or its inability, to prioritize basic security over private profit.

That’s a profound weakness in a world where other states have proven much more effective at coordinating their COVID responses to protect their populations and serve their political interests. The status quo of maxed-out defense spending as the priority for U.S. policymakers shortchanges American workers and the U.S.’s own interests for the sake of the bottom line.

It’s not too late to change course. Legislators taking a less destructive approach to future defense budgets can choose to cancel some of the unnecessary programs funded by this year’s budget. These include the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent, a nearly $300 billion commitment to replace all land-based nuclear missiles in the United States. Experts agree that these weapons are a profound vulnerability for the United States, increasing the risk of nuclear war without contributing to the U.S.’s ability to defend itself. That money could vaccinate the entire world against COVID — six times.

Another year defined by the suffering and uncertainty of life during a global pandemic has ended. In 2022, we can lift the curse of COVID with even moderate shifts in U.S. spending priorities. Let’s make this the last year defined by a crisis we have the tools to prevent.


Image: zimmytws via shutterstock.com
Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
Trump Vance Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump meets with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance before a call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Monday, August 18, 2025, in the Oval Office. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The roots of Trump's wars on terror trace back to 9/11

Global Crises

The U.S. military recently launched a plainly illegal strike on a small civilian Venezuelan boat that President Trump claims was a successful hit on “narcoterrorists.” Vice President JD Vance responded to allegations that the strike was a war crime by saying, “I don’t give a shit what you call it,” insisting this was the “highest and best use of the military.”

This is only the latest troubling development in the Trump administration’s attempt to repurpose “War on Terror” mechanisms to use the military against cartels and to expedite his much vaunted mass deportation campaign, which he says is necessary because of an "invasion" at the border.

keep readingShow less
President Trump with reporters
Top photo credit: President Donald Trump speaks with members of the media at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland on Sunday, September 7, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Is Israel forcing Trump to be the capitulator in chief?

Middle East

President Donald Trump told reporters outside a Washington restaurant Tuesday evening that he is deeply displeased with Israel’s bombardment of Qatar, a close U.S. partner in the Persian Gulf that, at Washington’s request, has hosted Hamas’s political leadership since 2012.

“I am not thrilled about it. I am not thrilled about the whole situation,” Trump said, denying that Israel had given him advance notice. “I was very unhappy about it, very unhappy about every aspect of it,” he continued. “We’ve got to get the hostages back. But I was very unhappy with the way that went down.”

keep readingShow less
Europe Ukraine
Top image credit: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, President of Ukraine, Keir Starmer, Prime Minister of the UK, and Donald Tusk, Prime Minister of Poland, emerge from St. Mary's Palace for a press conference as part of the Coalition of the Willing meeting in Kiev, May 10 2025, Kay Nietfeld/dpa via Reuters Connect

Is Europe deliberately sabotaging Ukraine War negotiations?

Europe

After last week’s meeting of the “coalition of the willing” in Paris, 26 countries have supposedly agreed to contribute — in some fashion — to a military force that would be deployed on Ukrainian soil after hostilities have concluded.

Three weeks prior, at the Anchorage leaders’ summit press conference, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted that Ukraine’s security should be ensured as part of any negotiated settlement. But Russian officials have continued to reiterate that this cannot take the form of Western combat forces stationed in Ukraine. In the wake of last week’s meeting, Putin has upped the ante by declaring that any such troops would be legitimate targets for the Russian military.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.