Why We Oppose the National Defense Authorization Act

The moment of ending a war widely viewed as a 20-year catastrophe, having spent $21 trillion on militarism during those 20 years, and the moment when the biggest Congressional question in the media is whether the United States can afford $3.5 trillion over 10 years for things other than wars, is hardly the moment to increase military spending, or even to maintain it at remotely its current level.

Tiny fractions of U.S. military spending could do a world of good in the United States and around the world, and the most serious dangers facing us are exacerbated, not ameliorated, by it. These include environmental collapse, nuclear disaster, disease pandemics, and poverty. Even in morally dubious economic terms alone, military spending is a drain, not a boost.

Militarism is often tied to “democracy,” with the US government currently planning an international conference on democracy even while arming the majority of the world’s most oppressive governments. But applying democracy to the US government would reduce military spending according to poll after poll after poll after poll. Last year 93 members of the US Congress voted to reduce the Pentagon’s portion of US military spending by 10%. Of the 85 of those 93 who stood for re-election, 85 were re-elected.

Our demand to members of the US House and Senate is to publicly commit to voting NO on the National Defense Authorization Act if it funds anything more than 90% of what it funded last year. We want to see those commitments made publicly and emphatically, with efforts to rally colleagues to do the same. That no caucus of the US Congress is yet taking this action is disgraceful.

That some members of Congress who say they want military spending reduced are accepting an increase proposed by President Joe Biden while opposing only an increase proposed by Congressional committees is reprehensible. Many more people die in the world whose lives could have been saved by redirecting a portion of military spending than are killed in the wars.

We would like to see House Members cosponsor H.Res.476, a non-binding resolution that proposes to move $350 billion out of the Pentagon’s budget. But until it has a chance of passing both houses, those endorsements will not impress us much. We would like to see them vote for amendments to undo the Congressional increase of $25 billion, and to reduce spending to 90% of last year’s level. But until those amendments stand a chance of passing, we will applaud quietly.

If Republicans oppose the NDAA in just one house of Congress (for their own bizarre reasons), it would take only a handful of Democrats insisting on reduced spending to halt or reshape the bill. Hence our demand: commit now to voting against the NDAA until military spending goes down by — at a very minimum — 10%. Make that simple commitment. Then we’ll thank you from the bottom of our hearts.

Reprinted from World Beyond War.

World BEYOND War was founded on January 1st, 2014, when co-founders David Hartsough and David Swanson set out to create a global movement to abolish the institution of war itself, not just the “war of the day.” If war is ever to be abolished, then it must be taken off the table as a viable option. Just as there is no such thing as “good” or necessary slavery, there is no such thing as a “good” or necessary war. Both institutions are abhorrent and never acceptable, no matter the circumstances. So, if we can’t use war to resolve international conflicts, what can we do? Finding a way to transition to a global security system that is supported by international law, diplomacy, collaboration, and human rights, and defending those things with nonviolent action rather than the threat of violence, is the heart of WBW. Our work includes education that dispels myths, like “War is natural” or “We have always had war,” and shows people not only that war should be abolished, but also that it actually can be. Our work includes all variety of nonviolent activism that moves the world in the direction of ending all war.

2 thoughts on “Why We Oppose the National Defense Authorization Act”

  1. With the armaments and capabilities that we already physically posses, we could defend our own actual national territory better than we are now for 10% of the military’s current budget, if that were truly our focus.
    Look for examples that this is a fact by comparing Russia’s military budget and what they have accomplished in terms of defense capabilities to our own, also look at Iran’s accomplishments in the same field for instance (very similar comparison).

  2. Great article and here are more reasons besides the fact the wars were all started with lies.

    AUGUST 25, 2021 Military Contractor CACI Says Afghanistan Withdrawal Is Hurting Its Profits. It’s Funding a Pro-War Think Tank.

    What CACI reveals about the feedback loop between military contractors and think tanks.


    October 17, 2020 Top 50 U.S. Think Tanks Receive over $1Billion from US Government and Defense Contractors

    The top recipients of this funding were the RAND Corporation, the Center for a New American Security, and the New America Foundation, according to analysis by the Center for International Policy.


Comments are closed.