A version of this story appeared in the daily Threat Status newsletter from The Washington Times. Click here to receive Threat Status delivered directly to your inbox each weekday.
President Trump has promised to end the Russia-Ukraine war, facilitate peace in the Middle East and start arms reduction talks with Russia and China, leaving open the prospect for the U.S. to reduce military spending.
The U.S. has the largest military budget in the world. An estimated $916 billion was spent on defense in 2023, a 2.3% increase from 2022, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. The institute noted that military spending went up in every region it examined.
The U.S. spends roughly twice as much on defense as China and Russia combined. U.S. defense spending also makes up nearly half of total discretionary spending.
The Trump administration is laying off federal workers and trying to cut spending in federal agencies. The government runs an annual budget deficit of nearly $2 trillion, and the national debt tops $37 trillion. Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency consider the Pentagon one of their targets for some of those cuts.
The state of proposed defense cuts is far from clear. An internal Pentagon memo last month suggested at least $50 billion in spending cuts this year, but a proposed stopgap spending bill this week in Congress would boost defense spending by $6 billion through Sept. 30.
Mr. Trump has said he wants annual defense spending cuts for the next four years. Republican lawmakers are likely to oppose this agenda.
Analysts said the geopolitical tensions that have spurred higher U.S. defense spending aren’t likely to change significantly.
“The unprecedented rise in military spending is a direct response to the global deterioration in peace and security,” said Nan Tian, a senior researcher at the Stockholm institute’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Program.
A 2023 report from the Congressional Budget Office, which conducts 10-year projections of the cost of U.S. nuclear forces, estimated that the U.S. will have spent $756 billion on nuclear arms and related programs, or roughly $75 billion annually, from 2023 through 2032.
The total comprises the costs of operating and sustaining old and new nuclear forces, modernizing nuclear delivery systems and weapons, facilities and equipment for the weapons laboratory complex, and modernizing command, control, communications and early warning systems. It also includes estimated cost growth.
The increase in defense spending was driven primarily by the Russia-Ukraine war that began more than three years ago, tensions in the Middle East and resistance to organized crime in the Caribbean and Central America.
Analysts say a decrease in U.S. military spending may not be on the horizon even if Mr. Trump’s peace plans for the Middle East and Ukraine succeed.
“Yes, there is potential for planned reductions in U.S. military spending to be growth-promoting, in the sense that resources that were being invested in the military, which does not directly produce revenue, can be invested in more productive activities,” Cullen Hendrix, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said in an email. “This was the case in the 1990s, not just in the United States but more widely. But that isn’t an inevitable or even particularly likely outcome this time.”
He said the “peace dividend” achieved in the 1990s after the Soviet Union collapsed was a response to a “diminished threat environment” and that investing more in the country through infrastructure, education and other social programs made sense, but the case is not the same this time.
“Those are far different than the circumstances we face now, where Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is being recast with Ukraine as the aggressor, U.S. allies are deeply concerned about U.S. treaty commitments, and China remains ascendant and geopolitically aspirational,” he said. “And we can add to that the massive security threat that would come with any attempt by the United States to expel millions of Palestinians and develop Gaza into a beachfront luxury destination under U.S. occupation. It would be an obvious target for terrorism.”
Andrea Stricker, deputy director of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies’ Nonproliferation and Biodefense Program, said a decrease in military spending would not put the U.S. in a good position once Mr. Trump leaves office.
“Even if Trump is more friendly with [China and Russia], Trump will leave office in four years, and tensions will resume, potentially. We don’t even know if they’re going away altogether, so we need to be prepared,” Ms. Stricker said.
Still, the government seems hopeful that the waste and fraud can be eliminated, or at least lessened, freeing up funds for other purposes. Mr. Musk and DOGE, an office Mr. Trump created, have been tasked with finding waste in government spending.
DOGE’s actions, including laying off thousands of federal employees and shuttering some agencies, have caused controversy. Some question whether these mass firings will save money.
Mr. Musk said on Joe Rogan’s podcast in February that the Defense Department is “a target-rich environment for saving money,” and he “did not think it would be as bad as this” when he began examining the government’s spending.
“If it was a very well-run ship, if it was very efficient, it would be hard to improve, but it’s not efficient. So, therefore, it is actually relatively easy to improve,” he said.
• Mallory Wilson can be reached at mwilson@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.