Follow us on social

Money

Will Congress force the Pentagon to share the ‘true cost of war’?

Bipartisan organizations are fighting to make sure a House-passed transparency measure isn’t a casualty of a smoke-filled room.

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex

Each year, the Senate and House each pass their own version of the National Defense Authorization Act, one of the few annual “must pass” bills. After going through months of public debate, the dueling versions of the bill are brought to the proverbial smoke-filled rooms of Capitol Hill, where top lawmakers quietly trade pet projects and hammer out the text that will reach the president’s desk.

Last year, one provision that never made it out of those smoke-filled rooms was an amendment, sponsored by Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) and passed by the House, that would have forced the Pentagon to disclose the full cost of America’s “pointillist empire” of overseas bases. 

This time around, activists are fighting to make sure that won’t happen again. “This amendment is crucial as taxpayers and other citizens remain concerned — and inadequately informed — about the cost to U.S. taxpayers of the wide range of U.S. military activities abroad,” wrote a broad group of activist organizations and research centers in an open letter to congressional leadership.

The letter’s signatories include the Friends Committee on National Legislation, R Street Institute, Just Foreign Policy, the Project on Government Oversight, Taxpayers for Common Sense, and the Quincy Institute, which publishes Responsible Statecraft.

The Bowman amendment, if maintained in the final bill, would build on previous efforts to increase transparency of Pentagon spending by forcing the Department of Defense to publicly share data on the cost of all of the military’s overseas operations. This would mean more transparency about the price tag of training dozens of foreign militaries, maintaining hundreds of bases, and carrying out a range of covert and drone operations, among other things.

“The American people deserve to know the true cost of war,” Bowman said in a statement.

The open letter comes amid a sharp increase in military spending, which is slated to reach $886 billion next year. Pentagon outlays now make up roughly half of the federal government’s entire discretionary budget. Meanwhile, some lawmakers are pushing for an emergency bill to add extra military funding while domestic spending is restricted by caps.

“Many Americans want greater public scrutiny and debate about the balance our nation strikes between spending on our military presence abroad and spending on other domestic priorities,” the open letter argues. “These debates will only become more relevant as our military budget approaches the $1 trillion mark.”

“[W]e urge you to do everything within your power to ensure that Rep. Bowman’s common sense, non-controversial, House-passed amendment is maintained in the final version of the NDAA,” the groups wrote.


(phanurak rubpol/shutterstock)
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
Could Trump's Congo-Rwanda mineral deals actually save lives?
Top photo credit: Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Thérèse Kayikwamba Wagner, left, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, center, and Foreign Minister of Rwanda Olivier Nduhungirehe, right, during ceremony to sign a Declaration of Principles between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda, at the State Department, in Washington, D.C., on Friday, April 25, 2025. (Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA)

Could Trump's Congo-Rwanda mineral deals actually save lives?

Africa

There may be a light at the end of the tunnel as representatives from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda are hoping to end the violence between them by signing a peace deal in a joint signing ceremony in Washington today.

This comes after the United States and Qatar have been working for months to mediate an end to the conflict roiling the eastern DRC for years.

keep readingShow less
Trump steve Bannon
Top photo credit: President Donald Trump (White House/Flickr) and Steve Bannon (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

Don't read the funeral rites for MAGA restraint yet

Washington Politics

On the same night President Donald Trump ordered U.S. airstrikes against Iran, POLITICO reported, “MAGA largely falls in line on Trump’s Iran strikes.”

The report cited “Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and critic of GOP war hawks,” who posted on X, “Iran gave President Trump no choice.” It noted that former Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, a longtime Trump supporter, “said on X that the president’s strike didn’t necessarily portend a larger conflict.” Gaetz said. “Trump the Peacemaker!”

keep readingShow less
Antonio Guterres and Ursula von der Leyen
Top image credit: Alexandros Michailidis / Shutterstock.com

UN Charter turns 80: Why do Europeans mock it so?

Europe

Eighty years ago, on June 26, 1945, the United Nations Charter was signed in San Francisco. But you wouldn’t know it if you listened to European governments today.

After two devastating global military conflicts, the Charter explicitly aimed to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” And it did so by famously outlawing the use of force in Article 2(4). The only exceptions were to be actions taken in self-defense against an actual or imminent attack and missions authorized by the U.N. Security Council to restore collective security.

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.