REMARKS: Ranking Member Coons presses Secretary Hegseth on Iran strategy at hearing: “How do I explain to my constituents the cost of this war?”

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, pressed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for answers on the Trump administration's strategy in the war with Iran and the administration's alienation of key allies in a subcommittee hearing today regarding President Trump's proposed $1.5 trillion defense budget request.

"What's the cost of the war we're in in Iran? How long will it go? What damage has been done to our security and our strategic position? When will we get a supplemental request, and of what scale? When will we be requested to authorize this war? And when will the American people get a clear answer about our strategic goals and how we will achieve them?" said Senator Coons.

In his opening remarks, Senator Coons emphasized that the U.S. faces a more dangerous world as Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea grow increasingly aligned, and warned that the Trump administration has created distance with our allies at a moment when the U.S. needs coordination and clarity.

"I share the chairman's concern that we have created real distance with our allies, most principally our NATO allies, who have stepped up and contributed tens of billions of dollars more to purchase the munitions for the defense of Ukraine and to dramatically increase their long-overdue investments in our joint defense in Europe," said Senator Coons.

Senator Coons criticized the department's failure to adapt to the needs of modern warfare, particularly by learning the lessons from the war in Ukraine, including Ukraine's success in developing and deploying drone and counter-drone technologies. He highlighted that the administration requested zero funding for Ukraine and key NATO allies in the Baltic states before the committee provided $400 million on a bipartisan basis. Instead, the administration is pouring money into a new line of outmoded "Trump class" naval destroyers.

"We have a president who seems more focused on a billion-dollar ballroom and a victory arch, rather than achieving actual victory," said Senator Coons. "The world of warfare is changing. Every major service can and should embrace smaller, lighter, faster, more distributed, lethal capabilities that will mostly be autonomous. This move towards a Golden Fleet, towards a new battleship, strikes me as moving in exactly the wrong direction, giving our adversaries a bigger target rather than a more capable platform."

Senator Coons also questioned Secretary Hegseth's focus on culture war issues, including book bans, erasing DEI efforts, anti-vaccine positions, and the dismissal of senior military leaders while we are in the middle of a conflict in Iran.

A video of Senator Coons' opening remarks is available here.

A transcript of Senator Coons' opening remarks is included below:

Senator Coons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Secretary Hegseth, General Caine - Chairman Caine, for appearing before us and for your testimony today. Let me just begin by expressing my gratitude to the service and sacrifice of the 2.8 million members of the joint forces and the civilians who support them, and in this urgent moment, to focus on a few simple and clear questions.

It bears repeating that the regime in Iran is a terrible regime that has the blood of thousands of American soldiers on their hands over decades, and that they pose a sustained and real threat to the United States in the region. And it bears repeating that our allies are increasingly distanced from us as our adversaries are increasingly aligned.

I agree with much of what the chairman said, including that we are in a moment of real contest and danger, in no small part because Russia, China, DPRK, and Iran are partnering. Russia and China are helping resupply Iran and the drones that they're using to contest and close the Strait of Hormuz, to target and kill Americans, and degrade our facilities. And so, if our adversaries are increasingly aligned, I think a core question is: are we?

We have so many questions, Mr. Secretary, about this budget proposal, this $1.5 trillion budget request. And at the core is going to be: What's the cost of the war we're in in Iran? How long will it go? What damage has been done to our security and our strategic position? When will we get a supplemental request, and of what scale? When will we be requested to authorize this war? And when will the American people get a clear answer about our strategic goals and how we will achieve them?

I share the chairman's concern that we have created real distance with our allies, most principally our NATO allies, who have stepped up and contributed tens of billions of dollars more to purchase the munitions for the defense of Ukraine and to dramatically increase their long-overdue investments in our joint defense in Europe. But, unfortunately, the way that the move towards war was launched 74 days ago - without consent, without consultation - has caused a real rift with our vital European allies.

And again, as the chairman said, and I agree, there is also a critical and urgent need for us to recognize and embrace that in the most important test field - the battlefield in Ukraine - where the Ukrainians are fighting bravely and successfully against Russian aggression, they have innovated. They have delivered the most lethal and capable drone and counter-drone technologies in the world.

What is bedeviling us in Iran right now? Their ability to use thousands of cheap, effective Shahed drones to hit our allies, their military facilities, and their oil and gas production facilities, and to target and hit civilian shipping. Who is the world's best at intercepting Shahed drones? Ukraine.

Last year, the administration requested zero for Ukraine and zero for our key NATO allies in the Baltic states. And, on a bipartisan basis, this committee put in $400 million.

When we met just about a month ago for the first time over at the Pentagon - thank you for that conversation - we all emphasized the importance of coming to us with a spend plan for these $400 million. This is a $1.5 trillion request in front of us. Why am I taking your time on $400 million? Because I think it shows a key piece, a missing piece, in strategic vision. We should not be standing aside from the war in Ukraine and saying, eventually we want to be a part of some peace between Russia and Ukraine. We should be learning the lessons of Ukraine.

Our allies in the Persian Gulf are. They're buying their interceptor systems at scale. Some of our current and former leaders in our military were working very hard to learn the lessons of Ukraine. I must say, in a recent briefing for this subcommittee, I was very encouraged by two very senior members of the United States Army who are in Ukraine and have been helping our armed forces learn. But my heart fell when I left and was told that those two senior officers were being forced out.

I am concerned that we have a distracted administration and a distracted department. From your written testimony, Mr. Secretary, it seems at times you're more passionate about fighting culture wars than winning the real war that we're in - at banning books, at cleaning alleged DEI off of websites, at taking on an anti-vaccine position rather than continuing the long-standing public health policies, and interfering with promotions. I'm stunned that you fired the 44-year chief of staff of the Army in the middle of a hot war and dismissed the Secretary of the Navy in the middle of a naval blockade. As dozens of senior flag-rank officers have been dismissed, I am worried about what that does to focus and morale.

We have a president who seems more focused on a billion-dollar ballroom and a victory arch rather than achieving actual victory - and a piece, a small piece, of the $1.5 trillion request in front of us, is for a new Trump class of battleships, a so-called Golden Fleet, which I think goes in the wrong direction.

Let me come back to the basic point I was trying to make. The world of warfare is changing. Every major service can and should embrace smaller, lighter, faster, more distributed, lethal capabilities that will mostly be autonomous. This move towards a Golden Fleet, towards a new battleship, strikes me as moving in exactly the wrong direction, giving our adversaries a bigger target rather than a more capable platform.

How do I explain to my constituents the cost - the cost of this war, and the cost that we are looking together to invest in our national defense?

I share the chairman's concerns about reconciliation. Last year, $150 billion was provided to the department, but the mismatch between base year and one year, between long-term and short-term, caused tens of billions of dollars in errors, errors in how shipbuilding was handled, errors in how new munitions are being acquired, and working together on a bipartisan basis, we fixed many of those problems. This year's budget proposal triples that request to $350 billion.

I agree with you about the urgency of our national defense. In your written testimony, you lay out four key goals: defend the homeland, deter China, increase burden sharing with our allies and partners, and supercharge the defense-industrial base.

As you've seen, in the last Congress, I've worked with you and with Deputy Secretary Feinberg on multi-year munitions. I cheer the goal of finally passing an audit in 2028. I think we have critical investments to make in our defense-industrial base. I think we are absolutely in the fight of our lives as a republic to win AI, and quantum space, and surveillance, and the capacity to fight drones and launch drones. But I'm concerned that you, sir, and this department is distracted by issues that are not focused on the core thing we need to achieve.

I could not agree more with what you said in your written testimony: 'For a generation, the United States was largely distracted by open-ended wars of regime change and nation building.' And, as you summarize this administration's approach, 'we will not send America's best to advance foolhardy or reckless adventures halfway around the world.'

Mr. Secretary, I agree that the Iranian regime is a terrible regime. I am grateful for the service and the sacrifice of the Americans who have been wounded or who have lost their lives in this current conflict. But I do not understand the strategy, and as the average American is seeing the costs at the pump and at the grocery store, and as this committee is being asked to approve the largest single-year increase in defense spending in decades, I need to better understand the answers to the urgent questions I've put before you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.