"The struggle between the White House and the Democrats": why the Trump administration threatened to block the draft defense budget

The White House may veto the draft defense budget for the next fiscal year if Congress approves the document in its current version. This is stated in a statement circulated by the Trump administration.

Initially, the Donald Trump administration was asking for $ 750 billion in defense and national security spending for the next fiscal year. This amount includes not only expenses of the military ministry directly, but also a number of other departments, including the Ministry of Energy. US defense spending grows year after year after Donald Trump became president of the United States: in the fiscal year 2018, $ 692 billion was spent on these needs, and in $ 2019 million in 2019.

Trump's desire to expand military spending is met with resistance from the Democratic Party, which has a majority in the lower house of congress. Democrats made a number of amendments to the draft US National Defense Act 2020 submitted by the presidential administration and cut the requested amount to $ 733 billion.

Of the amendments made by congressmen, the White House’s greatest indignation caused the President’s ability to redirect funds from the Pentagon’s budget to erect a wall on the border with Mexico, as well as send troops to patrol border areas. At the same time, on the initiative of the chairman of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi, the draft law left a provision on the allocation of $ 4.6 billion from the budget for the construction of the wall.

• Migrants on the border of the United States and Mexico.
• Reuters
• © Kim Kyung-hoon

In addition, the Democrats have laid down in the draft law on national defense a ban on the deployment of low-power nuclear warheads on sea-based ballistic missiles. It also caused protest from the Trump administration.

“Obstruction of the deployment (low-powered submarine launching nuclear missiles) may send our potential adversaries, many of whom are financing modernization in accordance with their own priorities, a dangerous signal that the United States is not able to correct its nuclear doctrine, despite the aggravation of the nuclear situation,” - quotes The Hill excerpt from the statements of the White House.

Recall, the administration of Donald Trump has long had the idea to equip Trident II D-5 intercontinental ballistic missiles with tactical nuclear warheads, it is assumed that such missiles will be placed on Ohio class submarines and on Columbia class submarines. Weapons of this type will allow the United States to contain Russia in Eastern Europe, as well as reduce the likelihood of large-scale nuclear war, according to the White House.

However, this idea from the very beginning caused outrage not only from Moscow, but also from American experts and politicians. Trump's opponents are confident that the emergence of such weapons will only increase the risks of a nuclear war. Any launch of an ICBM in wartime conditions will be regarded by the adversary as an immediate threat of a nuclear strike with corresponding consequences, experts say.

Another Democratic amendment that caused discontent with the White House concerns the decision of the head of state to withdraw the United States from the Treaty on Medium and Shorter-Range Missiles.

The statement said that the government objects to provisions that cancel funding for the development of response measures after the US withdraws from the INF mode, as well as the provisions of the national security bill that will prohibit the allocation of resources for the US to leave the Open Skies Treaty.

Recall that last year Donald Trump announced that Washington was withdrawing from the INF Treaty in response to violations from the Russian side. According to US officials, the Russian 9M729 cruise missile in terms of its tactical and technical characteristics violates the terms of the contract. Moscow has repeatedly denied these allegations and provided evidence of the compliance of the missile with the treaty.

The official procedure for the withdrawal of States from the treaty began in February of this year. In response, Russia also suspends its participation in the INF.

Back in December, a group of democratic legislators appealed to the president with a letter in which she called on the national leader not to destroy the INF. This appeal was not heard in the White House, and in March the Democrats submitted to the House of Representatives a bill banning the financing of projects that violate the conditions of the INF. Subsequently, these requirements were reflected in the amendments to the law on national defense.

• Trident II D5 ICBM launch training.
• Reuters
• © US Navy / Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Ronald Gutridge

“The termination of funding programs associated with the release of the United States from the INF range is a crucial moment. Taking such measures will hit the interests of defense companies counting on new-class missile contracts, ”said Vladimir Vasilyev, chief researcher at the Institute for the USA and Canada, in an interview with RT.

The White House also stated that it objects to the provisions of the bill that will prohibit the allocation of resources for the US withdrawal from the Open Skies Treaty (DON).

The agreement was signed in 1992, its participants are 34 states, including Russia and the United States. According to the document, countries can conduct observation flights over each other’s territory. Recently, however, Washington has sought to impede Russia's use of its rights under the agreement. This was announced in February of this year by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.

Washington accuses Moscow of selectively enforcing the terms of the treaty. Earlier, the American side imposed a number of restrictions on Russian flights over the States.

"Pre-election budget"

Presumably, the House of Representatives will hold a vote on the law on national defense already this week, US media say. However, experts have not yet taken to give predictions on the results of the vote.

“It’s hard to say what the final version of the document will be,” said Vladimir Vasilyev. - With the defense budget has developed a very difficult situation, this area has become a field of fierce struggle between the White House and the Democrats. But there is no unity in the ranks of the Democrats either, there is a serious split due to the initiative of Nancy Pelosi to allocate funds for the construction of the wall. ”

In the event that the current version of the bill remains unchanged, the White House may well meet its threat and veto the document, experts say.

• Donald Trump during the shatdaun was forced to order fast food for the athletes invited to the White House, because during the shatdaun the kitchen of the presidential administration did not work.
• Reuters
• © Joshua Roberts

“Trump can veto the bill, if it is not adjusted, it will trigger a kind of budget crisis. It is not excluded, by the way, that this crisis is even beneficial to Trump, because in this case the federal government will be able to be financed for some time under the 2019 scheme, which largely meets the interests of the Republicans, ”Vasiliev believes.

Recall that in 2015, Barack Obama, who headed the White House at the time, put a veto on the defense budget - according to the politician, the document provided for exorbitant spending on military needs. In addition, the bill did not allow Obama to fulfill his election pledge and to close the special military prison at Guantanamo in Cuba. However, after the second congressional vote, the president had to sign a compromise version of the document.

Donald Trump also faces difficulties in trying to fulfill promises made to voters. A crucial issue for the president is the fight against illegal migration and the construction of a wall on the border with Mexico. Previously, disagreements on this issue have already led to the longest shatdaun in US history - the suspension of funding for federal agencies. After 35 days, the parties managed to sign a compromise budget, but in order to raise funds for construction, Trump introduced a state of emergency in the territories bordering Mexico.

According to experts, the real significance of building a wall on the border with Mexico is deliberately exaggerated by both Trump and his opponents. Trump exploits anti-migrant sentiment, earning political points for himself, and his opponents from the Democratic Party use this to accuse Republicans of cruelty and xenophobia.

“We need to remember that the budget of 2020 is a pre-election budget, and each of the parties is trying to use it, in fact, as a legal way to buy votes,” said Vasilyev.

• Reuters
• © Bria Webb

However, budget crises caused by the clash of Democrats and Republicans, undermine public confidence in the two-party political system, and also lead to a radicalization of the political field, the expert said.

As explained in an interview with RT Director of the United States Foundation for them. Roosevelt at MSU Yuri Rogulev, the situation in which the executive branch is formed by one party, and the legislative - the other, has become typical of the States over the past decade.

“Barack Obama, too, for a long time could not hold the necessary bills because of the protest of Republicans in Congress. Because of this, many adopted laws can not begin to act in full force. This is a negative and dangerous trend, ”summed up the expert.