Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared before a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the Department of Defense’s FY27 budget proposal on Capitol Hill in Washington, April 29, 2026. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth rebuked questioning Democrats and prior administrations during a charged hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, which was planned to address the Pentagon's 2027 budget but evolved into a discussion about the conflict with Iran.
Hegseth established the atmosphere for what followed in his opening remarks, stating, "The paramount threat we currently encounter stems from the imprudent, ineffective, and pessimistic pronouncements of congressional Democrats and certain Republicans."
Hegseth's Wednesday appearance marks his initial congressional testimony since the war’s commencement. He is scheduled to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday concerning the Pentagon's request for a $1.5 trillion budget for 2027, the largest amount ever requested by the Department of Defense.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies before a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the Department of Defense’s FY27 budget request on Capitol Hill in Washington, April 29, 2026.Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters
The estimations for that budget application were completed several months prior, before the U.S. and Israel launched their assault on Iran in February, and do not factor in expenditures related to the Iran war.
Jules Hurst III, the Pentagon financial overseer, stated the war’s expenses have reached $25 billion thus far. The Defense Department has indicated intentions to request $200 billion in supplementary funds for the operation.
Hegseth and Democrats — alongside some Republicans — engaged in heated exchanges concerning the justification for the war, its timeline, and Hegseth’s dismissals of high-ranking military personnel.
Two Republicans — Reps. Don Bacon and Austin Scott — conveyed to Hegseth their disagreement with his dismissal of Gen. Randy George, the former Army chief of staff. GOP Rep. Jen Kiggans, a Republican, questioned Hegseth's decision to terminate former Navy Secretary John Phelan.
“When you’re determining if they’re adhering to the task they’ve been assigned, you have to institute a modification,” Hegseth mentioned about Phelan’s dismissal.
Around two dozen high-level officers have either been terminated or had their promotions halted without any explanation provided by the Pentagon. Hegseth offered an equally ambiguous remark regarding the dismissal of John Phelan, who previously held the position of Navy secretary.
“While you possess the constitutional prerogative to undertake such actions, it doesn’t inherently render them appropriate or prudent," Bacon remarked.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine testifies before a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the Department of Defense’s FY27 budget request on Capitol Hill in Washington, April 29, 2026.Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters
Hegseth was furthermore questioned regarding the four colonels who were obstructed from advancing to the rank of one-star general. Among these officers, two are Black, and two are women. According to two U.S. officials, none of these officers were encountering any disciplinary concerns and underwent thorough vetting prior to being selected for promotion.
“I foresee additional officers being removed as well,” Hegseth declared without furnishing a justification.
Democratic Rep. John Garamendi accused Hegseth of misrepresenting the war’s advancement and criticized him for what he portrayed as evolving rationales for initiating the war.
“The cost of living and fuel costs have surged by 40%, and inflation is escalating,” Garamendi stated. “So much for alleviating the cost of living. The president has entangled America in another Middle Eastern conflict. He's desperately endeavoring to disentangle himself from his own missteps.”
“You tarnish the reputation of the troops by labeling this a quagmire just two months in, thereby providing propaganda to our adversaries,” Hegseth retorted.
Committee Ranking Member Rep. Adam Smith asks questions of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth before the House Armed Services Committee in the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, April 29, 026.Luke Johnson/EPA/Shutterstock
During a tense interaction, ranking Democrat Adam Smith urged Hegseth to reconcile two seemingly contradictory assertions: the assertion that Iran’s nuclear program was “obliterated” during last summer’s assault on its nuclear facilities, as stated by President Donald Trump and other administration officials, and the claim that its nuclear program posed an imminent danger, which served as the justification for initiating the war.
Hegseth stated that despite the “obliterated” nuclear capabilities that the US is continuously monitoring, Iran maintained an “ambition” and a “conventional defense” that presented a menace.
“What is the strategy to effectively transform all of this deadly kinetic action into a positive advancement in the nuclear situation? Because we haven’t attained that point yet. Walk us through it. How does that unfold? How does it ultimately yield that outcome?“ Smith inquired.
“I must contest the underlying assumption of the question that nothing was accomplished. Operation Midnight Hammer proved highly successful,” Hegseth responded.
“What actions will we undertake moving forward?” Smith questioned.
Hegseth promoted Trump’s accomplishments regarding Iran, including withdrawing from the Iran nuclear agreement, eliminating Qassem Soleimani, and sanctioning the strike on Iran’s nuclear installations.
“It is imperative to confront this type of adversary, which is fixated on acquiring nuclear weapons, and guide them to a juncture where they relinquish them at the negotiating table, ensuring they never possess them,” Hegseth asserted.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine and Under Secretary of Defense, Chief Financial Officer Jules W. Hurst, testify before a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, April 29, 2026.Kylie Cooper/Reuters
The testimony from Jules Hurst III, the Pentagon's budget controller, was the inaugural official assessment from the Defense Department regarding the cost of the ongoing conflict. Hurst noted that a substantial portion of these costs is attributable to the extensive utilization of bombs and missiles.
Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, affirmed in his opening statement his dedication to a non-partisan military.
"My guiding principles for this position are derived from Gen. George C. Marshall, whose unwavering commitment to civilian oversight of the military and nonpartisan conduct remains a steadfast standard, which I frequently draw upon. I consistently endeavor to emulate his candor, presenting the facts to our leaders and invariably conveying what they need to acknowledge, irrespective of their preferences."
The hearing occurred just two days before the deadline stipulated by the 1973 War Powers Resolution, granting the president a 60-day period to undertake military strikes.
The resolution provides the president with the discretion to initiate military actions within a 60-day timeframe, which concludes on Friday. The legislation allows for a one-time 30-day extension for the president to act without explicit consent from lawmakers.
Defense specialists have long voiced apprehension regarding stockpile limitations, even before the conflict with Iran. Some assessments concerning a potential confrontation with China suggest that the United States might deplete its reserves of long-range missiles within the initial weeks of combat.
In less than a two-month period of engaging in exchanges of fire with Iran, the U.S. has expended approximately half of its inventory of certain missiles and other munitions, as indicated by an analysis released last week by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
Retired Col. Mark Cancian, a senior advisor at CSIS and a co-author of the report, stated that Operation Epic Fury "does introduce a vulnerability window" for a duration that could extend up to four years — the approximate time required to replenish stockpiles.
"The United States possesses an adequate supply of munitions to engage in this war, should it erupt once more," Cancian affirmed. "However, the potential hazard lies in a future conflict with China, where inventory levels are considerably below the levels desired by war strategists."
Pentagon representatives have asserted that the U.S. maintains sufficient ammunition to wage war against Iran. Nonetheless, the process of restocking the armed forces with novel munitions can span several years, with certain missiles requiring a construction period of one to two years. This delay reflects an inherent constraint on the annual production capacity of intricate munitions within the defense industry, thereby stimulating significant interest in substantial investments in comparatively inexpensive and easier-to-manufacture drones, which the Pentagon is persistently deploying into the Middle East.
Sourse: abcnews.go.com