Continuing Resolutions Without Regular Budgets Undermine U.S. Strategy

Every incoming president announces his strategy for the Middle East and other regions, but none will succeed if the Pentagon must rely on continuing resolutions rather than budgets. Continuing resolutions are stopgap measures that continue funding at prior year’s levels to sidestep the lengthy congressional debate that accompanies passage of long-term budgets. Dysfunction is bipartisan and spans administrations; the U.S. Congress has not passed a formal budget on time since 1996.

Bạn đang xem: Continuing Resolutions Without Regular Budgets Undermine U.S. Strategy

Reliance on continuing resolutions has become the norm in recent years. These stopgap measures prevent government shutdowns, but they wreak havoc on the Department of Defense’s ability to plan, procure, and posture effectively. In effect, they prevent modernization or changes to strategy since these often require upfront investment in excess of the normal operating budget. In an era when America’s adversaries advance rapidly in areas like hypersonic weapons, cyber capabilities, and unmanned systems, such fiscal stasis is perilous.

Xem thêm : 5 budgeting strategies for CFOs navigating economic uncertainty

Recent events—the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, open conflict between Israel and Iran, direct attacks against U.S. forces—demonstrate that the Middle East remains a critical theater. Threats emanating from the region challenge U.S. interests. Moreover, the ongoing competition for influence among Russia, China, and the United States in the Middle East underscores the need for a coherent, long-term strategy. This cannot be achieved with a shoestring budget, pieced together in increments of weeks or months.

For the Trump administration’s Middle East strategy to succeed, it must begin with a comprehensive budget that prioritizes three areas: force readiness, modernization, and alliance building. Each of these pillars requires predictable and adequate funding—conditions that continuing resolutions cannot provide.

Readiness is the foundation of military effectiveness. U.S. forces deployed in the Middle East must be equipped to deter and, if necessary, defeat adversaries in a volatile environment. Continuing resolutions, however, undermine readiness by delaying maintenance, curbing training cycles, and restricting access to munitions. For example, units tasked with counter-Islamic State operations or deterrence missions against Iran often operate with equipment and logistics chains strained by years of deferred investment. A long-term budget would allow for the timely allocation of resources to ensure that deployed forces are not just present, but also postured to succeed.

Modernization is essential to maintain a competitive edge. The Trump administration has emphasized the importance of investing in cutting-edge technologies, such as artificial intelligence, missile defense systems, and fifth-generation fighter jets. These capabilities are critical to counter asymmetric threats posed by adversaries in the Middle East. Yet, under a continuing resolution, new-start programs are frozen. This jeopardizes initiatives like the development of advanced air defense systems to protect allies like Saudi Arabia and Israel from Iranian missile attacks. By passing a long-term budget, Congress can empower the administration to accelerate these programs and ensure that U.S. forces remain technologically superior.

Finally, alliance building—what should be a cornerstone of the Trump administration’s foreign policy in the region—requires sustained financial support. The Abraham Accords have opened new avenues for cooperation, but these partnerships need to be underpinned by tangible commitments. Whether it is through joint military exercises, arms sales, or economic incentives, fostering trust and interoperability among allies demands predictable funding. Moreover, countering Iranian influence in places like Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon requires a coordinated approach that integrates military, diplomatic, and economic tools. Continuing resolutions, with their piecemeal allocations, undermine the holistic approach needed to cement these alliances.

Critics may argue that the political environment in Washington, defined by partisan gridlock and fiscal brinkmanship, makes long-term budgeting unrealistic. However, this defeatist mindset only perpetuates the cycle of dysfunction. The Trump administration must leverage its incoming Republican majority in Congress to push for a budget deal that prioritizes national security. Many Democrats will join in, because national security is far less polarizing than many social issues or top-line Trump priorities. There will be difficult choices and trade-offs, but the cost of inaction is far higher. Every dollar wasted on inefficiency is a dollar that could be used to deter adversaries, support allies, or protect American lives.

A long-term budget would send a signal to both allies and adversaries. For allies, it demonstrates a commitment to shared security objectives. For adversaries, it underscores America’s resolve and readiness. In the Middle East, where perception shapes reality, such signals are invaluable.