A serious annual defense budget will have to wait.
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) forces seized the British oil tanker Stena Impero on July 19, an outrage that follows Iran’s June 13 attacks on two oil tankers and the June 20 downing of an American drone. Yet rather than focusing on an increasingly volatile Iran, congressional Democrats are more interested in political gamesmanship than national security when dealing with the defense budget.
Cornered by international sanctions, Iran is lashing out with escalating viciousness, as ongoing economic turmoil has truly made both people and government desperate. This has culminated in the regime’s most recent proclamation of capturing 17 “U.S. spies.” Likely untrue, this claim illustrates how Iran’s hunger for conflict threatens American national security.
Accordingly, President Donald Trump correctly announced July 22 that the United States is bracing for the “absolute worst” with Iran. He already came to the brink of an airstrike against Iran following Iran’s destruction of the American drone in international airspace. Concern over Iranian casualties caused him to abort the mission at the very last minute.
While Trump’s administration is wisely taking seriously the magnitude of Iran’s dangers, on July 12 House Democrats passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the Department of Defense’s (DoD) annual budget, by strict party-line vote, with not one Republican among 220 congressional supporters. Unsurprisingly, the legislation is a transparently partisan piece of political theater.
The House NDAA amalgamates progressive political amendments that have little, if anything, to do with protecting America from serious national security threats like those posed by Iran. Various provisions regard renewable energy mandates, LGBT defense hiring practices, and other defense-unrelated line items. Where the bill does address national security, the proposal seems more apt to spite Trump than actually keep Americans safe. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), for example, sponsored an amendment that would block Trump from striking Iran military.
While international perils escalate, the House NDAA also hamstrings DoD programs with slashing budget cuts to multiple national security initiatives. The United States Air Force’s (USAF) Next Generation Air Dominance program lost $500 million, a whopping 50-percent budget reduction. Cuts of this magnitude would devastate the program, leading to the cancellation of critical new aerospace technology and substantial production timeline delays.
And the damage does not end there. The bill would also slice $413 million from the Missile Defense Agency and thus limit the agency’s ability to combat potential threats to the homeland. Overall, the NDAA provides $17 billion less than requested by the Trump administration.
Even worse, crony capitalism litters the NDAA. Perhaps most controversially, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith squeezed into the bill his very own $500 million “SpaceX earmark.” This notorious giveaway to an aerospace company rewards an all-too-frequent Smith political donor.
In addition to cutting an enormous check to a partisan ally, Smith’s provision also restructures USAF’s National Security Space Launch program to SpaceX’s clear advantage. The bill would force USAF to reopen the program’s government contracts contest, allowing private companies more opportunities to compete. USAF considers this boon for SpaceX, a loser in initial competitions, a national security disaster, as Smith’s political interests would disrupt meticulous USAF planning, throwing the entire program’s structure into chaos.
Democrats have instigated this politically frustrating situation while Iran’s increased aggression against the West warns that the American military needs sufficient resources to combat any and all potential threats. House Democrats are more interested in playing domestic politics with Trump, irrespective of strategic consequences beyond the water’s edge, rather than assuring America’s security on the world stage. Such congressional leaders might prefer to follow the late Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill in thinking that “all politics is local. Iran’s theocratic ayatollahs have other plans, unconstrained by lobbying constituencies.”
The House NDAA is dead on arrival in the Republican-controlled Senate, and, for good measure, the White House has threatened to veto the legislation if brought to the president’s desk. This overwhelmingly partisan legislation delivers ample political pork but fails to secure America’s common defense. Now, Senate Republicans face the vital responsibility of crafting an NDAA worthy of America’s defense.
Andrew E. Harrod holds a Ph.D. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and a J.D. from George Washington University Law School. He is a fellow with the Lawfare Project, an organization combating the misuse of human rights law against Western societies, and has written over 450 articles in print and online at outlets like the Algemeiner, The American Spectator, American Thinker, Breitbart, the Investigative Project on Terrorism, Jihad Watch, and the Washington Times. This article was cross-posted from The American Spectator.
mortimer says
They should cut a canal through the peninsula at Hormuz. There will be no further disturbances from Iran.
Peter Buckley says
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14633/iranian-intolerance
elee says
Is there no Steven Decatur in our time?
CRUSADER says
For there to be a Stephen Decatur, there’d have to be a Koran-scrutinizing Islam-skeptical, boldly democratic, patriotically driven President in the Executive Mansion….
“Stephen Decatur: A Life Most Bold and Daring”
book by Brian Kilmeade
“Our Country, Right or Wrong: The Life of Stephen Decatur, the U.S. Navy’s Most Illustrious Commander”
book by Leonard F. Guttridge
“Thomas Jefferson and the Tripoli Pirates”
book by Brian Kilmeade
elee says
Thanks!
CRUSADER says
“christianblood” no doubt revels in the mayhem going on in the USA, which he will perceive as a nation falling apart in the quagmire of its own exposed faults, while Iran is emboldened like a cornered hungry tiger which will find any angle to counterattack — by sending its terrorism abroad to dissuade Western powers or even by acting out as far as violently disrupting any construction of a fantastical circumventing canal…
Yet “christianblood” doesn’t understand this is how democracies grow — through highly challenging spurts of self doubt and then applied readjustment through re-evaluation of values; while the fearful theocratic authoritarian Iran is likely witnessing its own death throws as a modern experiment in how Shia Islam can exist in a volatile and pluralistic world!
elee says
I urge all to use the name Persia for that nation. That name served them well from antiquity to 1935. In 1935 they asked the world to call them “Iran” to emphasise their Aryan consanguinity with a rising world power. I do not accede to their request. Oh and they still hate Jews. It’s probably a little late for “Allah in heaven and Hitler on earth,” but aren’t they still printing and distributing Mein Kampf? The war against Nazis didn’t end in April of 1945. Persia, not “Aryan.”
CRUSADER says
Capital concept!
Redefining terms is all important and not trivial!
Greek Delights not Turkish.
Byzantiums are furniture pieces not Ottoman footstools.
Rome is a market place where all roads meet, not Mecca.
How about we call Deutschland as Nazi Germany until the fascists are defeated, and we call the land of the ayatollahs Iran until the Persians can free themselves from the bonds of slavery?
Shall the Zoroastrians reign supreme once again ? How about the Baha’i ? Where do they fit in with their jumbled blend of relativistic dilution of faiths?
Quazgaa says
Persians died not long after the battle of qadisiyyah.
Don’t mean to rain on your parade here, but the ugly truth is most iranians are shia muslims before being persians.
There is a saying in the middle east, the arabs will fight their wars to the last iranian soldier, and it might just br true.
What i don’t understand on the other hand, is the paradox of a nation hating the arabs for having conquered them, yet one ferociously embracing the no less arab shia islam.
If you happen to have an answer to this paradox, please share it with me. Thank you.
CRUSADER says
Middle East is a powder keg chock full of crazies!
Israel is the rational piece of land in the midst of this mayhem.
FOZ Museum:
https://www.fozmuseum.com/exhibits/
Mario Alexis Portella says
A very good presentation, Mr. Harrod! The Dems would be speaking differently if they had to live in Iran like the average person!
CRUSADER says
Let’s encourage matters to make Persia great again, but without the authoritarian ayatollah run Islamic Shia system which has taken hold there in Iran.
Angemon says
And Dems will wonder why Trump won 2020…
Terry Gain says
The House NDAA amalgamates progressive political amendments that have little, if anything, to do with protecting America from serious national security threats like those posed by Iran.
………
Iran will not pose a national security threat to the United States until it has nuclear weapons and the capacity to deliver them. The lesson has yet to be learned that on 9/11 America was attacked by Muslims who had been welcomed into the country. The biggest threat facing America is Muslim immigration. It is madness to allow adherents of an enemy ideology to enter the country.
Westman says
The situation with Iran is remarkably similar to that of pre-WWII Japan: A controlling religion that gives the demi-God leader absolute control, raises the believing people to superior status, prescribes/predicts world domination for the believers, is involved in foreign military operations, trade is under embargo, and its leaders call for diplomacy while simultaneously planning for attacks.
History doesn’t repeat exactly, yet it rhymes enough to predict that war with Iran is inevitable after it makes some future mis-step; believing its own mantra of Allah-given superiority. When that does happen, the shocked democrats will look rather foolish for undermining defense.
CRUSADER says
Great analogy with historical parallels aptly referenced!
Heady stuff.
No wonder the nips fell for it hook, line, sinker….
sheliak says
An American military conflict with Iran will be an unmitigated disaster for the US. Have we learned nothing from the Iraq debacle? Why do we pretend the local actors cannot contain Iranian ambitions? Israel possesses 200 nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia can pick up the phone and order nuclear weapons from the Pakistani nuclear program which the kingdom finances and the Gulf Emirates possess hundreds of billions of dollars with which to purchase conventional weapons. Meanwhile, Turkey undermines Iranian influence wherever possible. The Asians, who are eating our economic lunch, are the nations which depend on Gulf oil exports. Why is a so called energy independent America responsible for mediating this ongoing middle east boiling cauldron?
Westman says
Good questions. So what is your answer?
CRUSADER says
End of Days
CRUSADER says
Pick up a copy of this book, as one of the scenarios goes point by point into what conflict with Iran would be like….
“7 Deadly Scenarios: A Military Futurist Explores War in the 21st Century”
by Andrew F. Krepinevich
Quazgaa says
Best outcome for the US would be to get the arabs to directly fight the iranians..
I know, I’m daydreaming.
Good thing we have Israel, just sayin’.
gravenimage says
Democrats Fiddle While Iran Burns
………………………….
Good piece from Andrew Harrod. One might title this “Democrats Fiddle While Iran Sets Us on Fire”, though.