US Acknowledges Spending Billions on Iran War

The United States has acknowledged for the first time the direct cost of its current war against Iran: at least US$25 billion in just two months of operations. The figure, disclosed in Congress, introduces a new source of controversy in the domestic political debate, where doubts are growing about the scope, duration, and viability of the military strategy pursued by the administration of Donald Trump.

The figure was presented during a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, in a tense session in which War Secretary Pete Hegseth firmly defended the intervention.

The official not only justified the spending but also dismissed criticism, amid an increasingly polarized political climate in Washington, and labeled lawmakers who question the conflict as “defeatist.”

US acknowledges US$25 billion spent on war in Iran

The US$25 billion figure represents the Pentagon’s first official estimate of the cost of the conflict. The amount mainly includes spending on munitions, military operations, and the replacement of equipment destroyed during actions in Iranian territory and across the region.

The estimate was presented by War Department financial officials during the hearing, at which Hegseth appeared alongside senior military leaders. Lawmakers from both parties used the occasion to demand clarity on the use of public resources in a war that, according to several of them, lacks defined objectives and an exit strategy.

Although the government insists the operation has been effective, the acknowledgment of the cost itself has intensified scrutiny. Analysts in Washington warn that the figure could rise significantly in the coming months, especially if the conflict is prolonged or escalates in intensity.

In addition, Hegseth, accompanied by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine, used the hearing to request a US$1.5 trillion defense budget for 2027. The secretary argued that this increase is imperative to counter adversaries such as China, Russia, and the Islamic republic, prioritizing the large-scale acquisition of drones, warships, and missile defense systems.

.@SECWAR "The $1.5 trillion budget will ensure that the United States continues to maintain the world’s most powerful and capable military as we grapple with a complex threat environment across multiple theaters." pic.twitter.com/z3fEaIXs6W

— DOW Rapid Response (@DOWResponse) April 29, 2026

Political clash in Congress over the legitimacy of the war

The hearing exposed deep divisions between Republicans and Democrats. Hegseth defended the war as a necessary action to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, an argument that has been central to the official narrative since the start of hostilities.

However, several lawmakers questioned the consistency of that justification. Some recalled that the government itself had previously stated that Iran’s nuclear capability had been neutralized, raising questions about the true reasons for the conflict.

The tone of the debate escalated quickly. From the opposition, the intervention was described as costly, poorly planned, and politically risky. Hegseth responded sharply, accusing critics of weakening the United States’ position against its adversaries.

In addition, the Democratic caucus challenged the “maximum pressure” strategy and the depletion of U.S. arsenals. “You can win a lot of small battles and lose the war, which is why you don’t stumble into a conflict in the first place,” said Representative Adam Smith, the top-ranking Democrat on the committee. “The strategy appears to be the use of as much violence, threats, and coercion as possible to bend the world to our will. I think that is a very dangerous strategy,” he added.

Hegseth responded forcefully, accusing lawmakers of undermining the war effort at a time when three U.S. aircraft carriers are deployed in the region and forces are facing attacks from Hezbollah on the Lebanese front. “The greatest challenge, the greatest adversary we face at this point, is the reckless, ineffective, and defeatist words of Democrats in Congress and some Republicans,” the War Secretary said.

Despite this, Hegseth faced criticism even from parts of the Republican caucus. Some representatives from President Trump’s party expressed alarm over internal management at the Pentagon following the purge of senior military leadership carried out by the Defense Secretary.

In this regard, Republican Senator Thom Tillis admitted having “second thoughts” about his support for the secretary after the dismissal of key leaders, including Army Chief of Staff General Randy George. Meanwhile, Republican Representative Austin Scott described George’s removal as “reckless conduct” and an “extreme detriment” to the institution.

.@SECWAR "We are rebuilding a military that the American people can be PROUD OF.

One that instills nothing less than UNRELENTING FEAR in our adversaries and the utmost confidence in our allies.

WE FIGHT TO WIN IN EVERY SCENARIO…" pic.twitter.com/uIVt0WKaCD

— DOW Rapid Response (@DOWResponse) April 29, 2026

A war without a clear end

Beyond the political clash, the US$25 billion figure is also fueling concern about the duration of the conflict. Although it was initially projected as a short operation, the war has extended, and for now there are no clear signs of an imminent resolution.

The Pentagon has avoided offering a total cost projection, but internal reports cited during the hearing suggest that additional large-scale funding may be required. In fact, the possibility of requesting resources from Congress exceeding US$200 billion has already been discussed, which would drastically increase the war’s fiscal impact.

Meanwhile, the conflict has also had indirect economic effects. Rising oil prices—the highest in four years—and uncertainty in energy markets have begun to affect U.S. consumers’ wallets, adding political pressure on the White House.

In his defense, Hegseth said the military campaign has significantly weakened Iran’s capabilities, including strikes on key facilities. However, several lawmakers and experts question the real effectiveness of those operations and warn that the conflict may be entering a phase of stagnation.

The risk of a prolonged war, similar to past experiences in the Middle East, is appearing more frequently in public debate. The word “quagmire” was mentioned by some members of Congress to describe the current scenario, a characterization the secretary flatly rejected.