By Ling Yunzhi

The White House formally submitted to Congress the federal budget proposal for fiscal year 2027 on April 3, proposing defense spending as high as 1.5 trillion US dollars, setting a record for military expenditure in modern US history.

Soaring military spending to a record level reflects the priority given to defense issues

To understand the essence of the US FY2027 defense budget proposal, three core features must first be identified, namely a breakthrough in scale, an imbalance in structure, and a focus on strategic deployment.

First, in terms of scale and growth, the defense budget features an unprecedented increase of 445 billion US dollars and a year-on-year rise of 42%, a level rarely seen in the post-World War II period. Given that the US federal government debt has exceeded 39 trillion US dollars and fiscal deficits remain high, the budget proposal underscores the priority given to defense issues within the Trump administration, and also reflects the US policy-making establishment's attempt to reshape the global balance of power through overwhelming military investment.

Second, in terms of spending structure, the budget proposal shows a clear pattern of "military expansion coupled with social contraction." On one hand, defense spending, along with border security and immigration enforcement, receives substantial funding increases. On the other hand, non-defense spending is cut by 10 percent overall, with reductions specifically targeting climate change initiatives and diversity, equity and inclusion-related programs that the Trump administration has long opposed. This structure reflects an effort to reshape the political agenda in a profound way: strengthening the state's external deterrence and internal control, while weakening its role in public services and social welfare.

Finally, in terms of strategic allocation, the budget proposal reflects a sharper focus and selective deprioritization in the US global military engagement. The proposal makes no mention of Ukraine, standing in stark contrast to the large-scale US assistance to Ukraine over the past two years. This indicates that, in the Trump administration's strategic priorities, the Middle East, particularly Iran, and major-power competition have replaced Europe-centered "proxy warfare" as the top military concerns.

War exhaustion is compounded by political maneuvering

The budget proposal also reflects the fiscal strain generated by the US military operations against Iran, as well as domestic political calculations ahead of the midterm elections.

First, the sustained and costly military operations against Iran have acted as a catalyst for the surge in the defense budget. According to incomplete estimates, during the military operations launched against Iran, direct US military expenditures reached as high as 2 billion US dollars. This figure does not include additional costs such as replenishment of expended munitions, compensation and medical expenses for casualties, or indirect costs arising from potential long-term retaliation and regional instability. Such spending has already rendered the existing US defense budget insufficient to cover rapidly expanding battlefield expenditures. Under these circumstances, the US government has called on Congress to immediately approve additional large-scale appropriations, while seeking to incorporate emergency wartime expenditures into a long-term budget framework on a more normalized and institutionalized basis.

Second, the upcoming midterm elections represent a key domestic political driver behind the push for this extremely expansive budget proposal. The timing of the proposal, just months before the midterm elections and during ongoing military operations, suggests that the ruling Republican Party is attempting to link "national security" with support for the president as a central electoral theme. By putting forward an exceptionally inflated defense budget, Trump seeks to project a "wartime president" image. At the same time, any opposition to the proposal is likely to be framed as "not supporting the military" or "being soft on Iran." In this way, heightened public perceptions of crisis and nationalist sentiment are mobilized to weaken the Democratic opponents and gain electoral advantage.

Overall, this astronomical defense budget proposal is a distorted product of hegemonic anxiety, war-driven inertia, and domestic political manipulation. It will not deliver genuine security for the US. Instead, by eroding its domestic foundations and exacerbating debt risks, it risks dragging both the US and the global world into a costly arms race trap.

Editor's note: Originally published on thepaper.cn, this article is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.