Independent analysts say the Pentagon’s public estimate excludes major expenses tied to damaged bases, depleted missile inventories, debt financing and long-term veterans’ benefits, placing the war’s potential taxpayer cost far above the administration’s figure.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Independent national security and budget analysts are disputing Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s estimate that the conflict with Iran has cost approximately $37.5 billion, arguing that the full taxpayer burden may already exceed $100 billion once damaged military infrastructure, expended weapons and other direct and indirect expenses are included.
Hegseth presented the $37.5 billion figure Tuesday during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing examining President Donald Trump’s June 24 supplemental funding request. The administration is seeking $72 billion related to the Iran conflict, including $67 billion for Hegseth’s department.
Stephen Semler, co-founder of the Security Policy Reform Institute, said his own estimate placed the war’s cost at approximately $112.3 billion as of Tuesday, the 145th day of the conflict, according to a report by the Daily Caller News Foundation. He had not published a detailed breakdown of that calculation.
“I think Pete Hegseth has lied to Congress about the cost of the Iran War,” Semler told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “It’s already the most disliked war in history, according to my own analysis of polling data dating back to World War II. So I think, and the administration has gone really far out of its way to hide the costs of the war, even the direct costs I’m talking about, from the American public.”
Semler argued that Hegseth’s estimate is difficult to reconcile with the much larger supplemental request being presented to lawmakers.
“There’s no single way to take his estimate seriously, especially because he said the war cost under 40 billion, but then he said that at a hearing in which he was justifying the administration’s request for $72 billion worth of Iran War funding, including $67 billion for Hegseth’s own department,” Semler said. “I don’t even know how to describe it really at this point … It just seems like brazen lying at this point.”
The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment. The White House referred questions about the cost to Hegseth’s remarks during Tuesday’s Senate Appropriations Committee hearing.
The conflict began Feb. 28 and resumed July 7 after the Trump administration accused Iran of violating a June memorandum of understanding by attacking commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz. American forces subsequently conducted repeated strikes throughout Iran, including a 13th consecutive night of attacks Friday.
Tehran has retaliated against U.S. military installations in Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan and Kuwait, Reuters reported.
The human cost has also continued to rise. Eighteen U.S. service members have been killed and more than 500 wounded, according to an unidentified American official cited by Reuters.
Analysts Call Official Figure ‘Totally Implausible’
Critics say the $37.5 billion figure does not capture the full cost of military operations, particularly damage to American bases and equipment in the Middle East.
“I see Pete Hegseth come up with this number that’s just totally implausible, absurd, really,” Semler said. “After I’ve gone through all that work, and it just like makes my eyes roll to the back of my head. And worse yet, you have media outlets just basically treating it as the prevailing estimate.”
Ben Freeman, director of Democratizing Foreign Policy at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said the administration’s estimate omits categories of spending acknowledged even by Pentagon budget officials.
“$37.5 billion is nowhere [near] the full cost of the Iran war,” Freeman said. “Even the Pentagon’s own Comptroller admits this number doesn’t account for enormous costs, like the damage done to U.S. military bases and equipment in the region. Independent estimates by people that aren’t funded by the Pentagon or its contractors put the current costs much higher.”
Steve Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University, said initial government estimates for major wars have historically fallen far below their ultimate costs.
“To understand the government’s habit of lowballing the cost of wars, consider the war in Iraq,” Hanke said. “In the Iraq War, the cost estimates initially submitted by the Bush administration were around $200 billion. That war ended up costing $5 trillion, 25 times the original estimate. Using that multiple, if the war winds down rather quickly, we are looking at a final direct cost of the Iran war in the neighborhood of at least $1 trillion.”
Allison McManus, managing director for National Security and International Policy at American Progress, said Congress should require the Pentagon to operate under the same budget controls applied to other departments.
“Congress should insist that Secretary Hegseth manage the Pentagon budget in the same way as all other departments manage a budget,” McManus said. “Congress should remember that this is not a war that Iran brought to the United States, but one that Secretary Hegseth and President Trump embarked on with full knowledge of the resources available. That they could not achieve success within those constraints does not mean that the American taxpayer should pick up their bill.”
Hanke expressed little confidence that lawmakers would conduct a detailed review of the conflict’s financing.
“Congress has, at best, the most tenuous grasp on Uncle Sam’s war of choice in Iran,” Hanke said. “Indeed, the U.S. Congress has essentially turned a blind eye to this great misadventure. In my wildest dreams, I can’t imagine that they would look into the details related to funding the war.”
Missile Use and Daily Operations Drive Costs Higher
The financial debate is unfolding alongside concerns that the Iran campaign has sharply reduced American stocks of critical defensive weapons.
Between Feb. 28 and April 21, the U.S. military used an estimated 45% to 61% of its Patriot missile inventory, according to a Center for Strategic and International Studies report.
The report estimated that American forces expended between 1,060 and 1,430 Patriot missiles from a stockpile totaling approximately 2,330 interceptors.
Those figures are several months old and do not account for missiles used after the war resumed in July. More current inventory data have not been made public, leaving the present condition of the Patriot stockpile unknown.
McManus said daily spending will continue even during periods when the pace of combat operations slows.
“The costs will continue to mount as long as operations continue,” McManus said. “Even if operations are less frequent and intense than the initial days of the war, the costs of forward deployments, reserve deployments, the cost of munitions, potential damages, and ever-increasing costs of fuel (which is obviously necessary to run sorties and keep naval assets in the region) will add up day after day. Without knowing exactly the nature of missions from day to day, it’s hard to estimate a per-day amount, but guessing that the war could cost around $500 million or even $1 billion a day is not out of the question.”
Steven Bucci, a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former Pentagon official, said the spending levels are consistent with a campaign relying on aircraft and expensive long-range weapons.
“These costs are reasonable given the type of high-intensity combat that is being conducted,” Bucci said. “The major tools being used are A/C and stand-off munitions. They are expensive to maintain and use. The costs will depend on the length of the operation.”
Freeman warned that consuming interceptors and straining maintenance systems in the Middle East could reduce military readiness for a possible confrontation in Asia.
“We’re consistently told that the reason for these historic Pentagon budget increases is so we’re ready to counter China,” Freeman said. “Yet, at the same time, this administration is waging a misguided war with Iran that has decimated our readiness for a conflict with China. We’re dangerously low on many munitions, sustainment pipelines are strained, and we’re canceling trainings because of the Iran war. All of this makes us less, not more, safe. So, if you’re actually worried about China, you should be against the Iran war.”
Freeman also connected the conflict’s cost to the federal government’s growing debt burden.
“We’re paying for this war, and any additional Pentagon funding, with Uncle Sam’s credit card,” Freeman said. “The U.S. is on track to rack up a $2 trillion budget deficit this year, which is adding to our enormous $40 trillion national debt. Just the interest we’re paying on the debt is now more than we’re spending on the military every year. So, any time we waste money on foreign wars, we’re only adding to this ticking time-bomb.”
The Pentagon’s public cost estimates also generally exclude future obligations, including disability payments, medical care and other support for veterans injured during the conflict, according to Gabe Murphy, a policy analyst at Taxpayers for Common Sense.
“The Pentagon’s estimates also generally exclude future indirect taxpayer costs, such as veterans’ benefits, additional interest on debt-financed spending, and more,” Murphy said.
Murphy also questioned the legal basis for continuing the conflict without a specific congressional authorization.
“Congress never authorized this war with Iran and it is far past the 60-day period during which the president contends he can legally continue hostilities,” Murphy said. “Lawmakers should demand an actual strategy and plan to end this war. The Pentagon has enough cash to cover the costs for the near-term. After the end of the war, the Pentagon can send a detailed request for additional funding to replenish munitions that Congress can consider.”
Both chambers approved an Iran war powers resolution in June. A second House measure passed 214-208 on July 23, while a corresponding Senate effort failed by a 49-47 vote.
Analysts said the eventual cost will depend heavily on the conflict’s length and whether the United States expands the scope of its military involvement.
“The longer the conflict goes on, the more costs rise,” Freeman said. “If the conflict goes through the end of the year and if we escalate our involvement–by putting boots on the ground in Iran, for example–you could easily see costs soar into the hundreds of billions of dollars.”
Original article
Comments