Lawmakers on the Senate Armed Services Committee are considering an amendment that would grant an additional $25 billion to next year’s budget for national security and defense.
During the closed-door work session Wednesday, Republican Senators introduced the amendment, which they believe will garner widespread bipartisan support amongst members of the chamber. “I feel very confident about getting support, from Democrats too,” said Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe. The funds will subsidize new missiles for the Marine Corps, 12 new airplanes and weapons systems for the Air Force, modern tactical and quality of life equipment for the Army and adjusted flight hours for the Navy.
Earlier this year, President Joe Biden requested approximately $753 billion for the national security budget, allocating around $715 billion for the Pentagon; an increase of 1.6 percent from the year prior. When adjusted for inflation rates, however, the amount is slightly disparate from former years, during which the Trump administration boosted Pentagon funding.
Described as a ‘slight increase’ from those in the corporate press establishment, Biden’s draft budget takes aim at the “substantial challenges, emanating from countries like China and Russia, and from threats to global security, such as from climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic.” The “pacing challenge” from China in the Indo-Pacific, according to Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, requires “additional investments to address strategic competition,” reflecting a “shift in resources to match priorities.” Biden’s proposed budget corresponds with the withdrawal of US troops occupying Afghanistan — however, the administration will continue carrying out other counterterrorism missions in the region.
“A chunk of this budget request, on the defense side in particular, is to pay for the pay raise for men and women in uniform, and then the civilians that support them; I think that’s something we could find support for on both sides of the aisle,” an administration official told reporters. “The focus will be on investments on nondefense, but also ensuring the Defense Department… can continue its strategic goals as we outcompete China, and as we ensure that the men and women in uniform have everything that they need.”
Both chambers of Congress have also conducted preliminary discussions about next year’s defense allowance. Biden’s proposed budget, according to Republican lawmakers, fails to keep up with current inflation costs and hampers America’s efforts to address potential threats posed by China and terrorist organizations around the world.
In the House, hawkish trepidations have mostly fallen on deaf ears. House Democrats, earlier this month, advanced a $706 billion defense spending proposal to the chamber floor after a party-line vote, despite groaning supplications from warhawks about funding deficiencies. The proposal would cut against Biden’s budget, leaving less money for research and development, weapons procurement and testing capabilities. Leading progressive and anti-war Democrats, nonetheless, maintain that an increased spending allotment is no longer necessary.
Establishment Republicans and Democrats in both chambers, of course, can be expected to approve spending increases. With the forthcoming mid-term elections ahead, the duopoly is seizing on the opportunity to harden its rhetoric on China, while pushing forward to empower the state-funded military-industrial-complex and enterprise network.
“The defense appropriations bill is a jobs bill,” Democrat Rep. Betty McCollum of Minnesota said. “Across the country, millions of jobs are funded by this bill. These are jobs in all of our congressional districts — union jobs in industry, manufacturing, small businesses, as well as jobs in scientific research and academia.”
“Now is the time to prioritize our national security funding, not shortchange it,” said Republican Rep. Kay Granger of Texas.
The proposed budgetary requests, championed by corporate and establishment interests in both popular branches of government and the media, follow lock-in step with America’s imperial foreign policy; for, of course, Washington lawmakers might rarely learn from past mistakes. It does not matter whether or not the Pentagon receives an additional $25 billion. In terms of how it exercises power and influence around the world, Biden’s record on the international playing field suggests that he has concocted a unique combination of Obama-style internationalism with a Pompeo-like realist pugnacity.
For, on the one hand, Biden desires a renewed and reinvigorated cross-Atlantic partnership with Europe; that is the only method by which the West can counter Russian and Chinese aggression. The Biden administration has renewed trade and aid agreements with the United Kingdom, as well as a military cooperation agreement. UK and US forces, respectively, have sailed naval ships into the Black Sea, warranting challenge from Russia. And most importantly, casting aside the domestically popular concerns pertaining to Russian election interference and Kremlin-sponsored cybersecurity attacks, Biden ended sanctions on the German-Russian natural gas pipeline, despite dissent from Ukraine and American lawmakers.
In concert with the new American president, western allies also reinstated a vitreosity for the rules-based-order; European nations, the United States and the European Union have unleashed multiple rounds of sanctions against Russian and Chinese officials. Military tensions continue to flare over the Taiwan-question. And western nations are still grasping at straws to preserve Hong Kong’s democracy.
By their lonesome, a particular state in the West would falter under the weight and ire of both the Kremlin and the People’s Hall. Biden and his European friends believe they cannot undermine Chinese and Russian aggression without a strong cross-Atlantic partnership, for there is safety in numbers.
Biden is also a bold character. Like Trump, Biden is willing to continue conducting America’s imperial war against terror without regard for its cost to life, limb or wallet. Ordinary Americans ought not be forced to subsidize such a ludicrous endeavor on the part of Washington. But Biden, the generals, Congress and the MIC need more for war.
He announced the final withdrawal of America’s military occupation of Afghanistan, ending Washington’s twenty year long mission in the nation. His plan, however, will station approximately 600 troops in Kabul, including officers and specialists from the Central Intelligence Agency. Future US-led counterterrorism efforts are not out of the picture, nonetheless. The airstrikes haven’t stopped in Syria or Iraq — and in Somalia, the airstrikes are back. Biden doubtless forgets the misgivings of the past. His administration cannot double down on force and expect the world to acquiesce.
And, in the end, like Congresswoman McCollum said, a strong defense industry is good for the health of the economy — more money for taxpayer-funded jobs, research, bombs and aid. Future generations will lament the United States government for its decision to continue such a policy. Year after year, Washington, regardless of what regime is in control, ignores the laws of modern day international statecraft. A state cannot, and ought not, be a global empire. It cannot continue robbing the taxpayer to subsidize endless, imperial wars. Biden’s international policy is ignorant of the folly of American exceptionalism, and the dangers inherent to it.
Good read, thanks for the details I’ve not heard, or read in other sources.