Front and Center: March 22, 2026

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CITES NUCLEAR CONCERNS AS REASON FOR WAR IN IRAN

On February 28, in the midst of diplomatic negotiations on Iran’s nuclear weapons program, the United States and Israel carried out a coordinated military operation against Iran. The Trump administration cited anxiety over Iran’s nuclear weapons program as one of the confusing and sometimes contradictory justifications for the attack, despite a lack of evidence that Iran had restarted its nuclear activity. Iran’s nuclear facilities were not targeted until days after the war began, when the Natanz nuclear facility was struck on March 2, casting doubt on the validity of this justification. Further, President Donald Trump and administration officials repeatedly stated that Iran’s nuclear facilities were “obliterated” in attacks last June. 

The reverberations of this war are being felt around the world as Iranian retaliatory missile strikes impact countries across the region and shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz are gridlocked, leading to rising global oil prices. The risk of further escalation continues to rise.

Additionally, uncertainty swirls around the nuclear specter in Iran. Earlier this month, President Trump told reporters that he had not ruled out the possible deployment of ground troops in Iran to seize Iran’s stockpile of 60 percent enriched uranium by force; the logistics and risk involved in such a mission “would be prohibitive, to say the least,” one source told CNN. Of further concern is the uncertainty regarding the nuclear doctrine of the new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi has indicated that Iran’s nuclear doctrine under the new Supreme Leader is not likely to change significantly, theoretically signaling a continuation of his predecessor’s fatwa against the development and/or use of weapons of mass destruction. As this war unfolds, we seem to be left with more questions than answers.

The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation categorically opposes this war of choice. The day it began, we issued a statement condemning the attack and calling on Congress to act.

“The self-declared ‘President of Peace’ proved that he doesn’t take negotiation and diplomacy seriously,” said Executive Director and former Congressman John Tierney. “He has chosen, seemingly unilaterally, to risk the lives of American servicemembers and civilians in the Middle East without a legal basis or a clear strategy.”

CONGRESS REJECTS IRAN WAR POWERS RESOLUTIONS, WILL IT ALSO REJECT FUNDING IT?

In early March, the House and Senate voted largely along party lines to reject Iran War Powers Resolutions introduced in both chambers of Congress. These resolutions would have curbed President Trump’s ability to continue this war and also highlighted President Trump’s violation of the Constitution, which assigns Congress the sole power to declare war.  

It is unclear yet how much additional money the Trump administration will request to fund this unconstitutional, unjustified and unnecessary war. The war is already costing taxpayers nearly $1 billion per day while cost increases are being felt at the gas pump and soon in the grocery store. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) told reporters that a supplemental funding package is “inevitable” but that the House will “pass a supplemental when it’s appropriate and get it right.” House Democrats are likely to put up a fight against any further funding, leading to an uphill climb. More detail on the supplemental can be found below.

IRAN WAR PUSHES PENTAGON SPENDING EVEN FURTHER INTO THE ABSURD

The President’s Budget Request, a largely political document, is set to be released in the coming weeks. Last week, the Pentagon’s Comptroller and Chief Financial Officer Jules Hurst gave further indications that the request for fiscal year 2027 could be close to President Trump’s desired $1.5 trillion. That staggering number may not exclusively come via the traditional budget process as Republicans mull a second reconciliation bill. That topline represents a $500 billion, or 50%, increase over last year’s already record request. We support national security but have pushed back and will continue to push back on exorbitant funding for a department that cannot prove it is a good steward of taxpayer dollars. 

Separately, the White House and Pentagon are likely to request additional funding outside this year’s budget request for the war in Iran. Widespread reporting suggested initially that this request will total at least $50 billion. However, last week, $200 billion has been floated, although Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth commented that number “could move.” As a reminder, Congress approved $839 billion in Pentagon spending in February in addition to the $150 billion the military received via last year’s reconciliation bill.

DÉJÀ VU IN THE MIDDLE EAST

As March 20 marked the 23rd anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, it’s worth a reminder that we’ve been here before. We’ve seen Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convince the United States to invade a Middle Eastern country over potential weapons of mass destruction. We’ve seen U.S. presidents declare victory before ramping up war efforts. 

After a Netanyahu press briefing attacking the Iran nuclear deal in 2018, The Hill published an op-ed from Executive Director John Tierney, “Don’t let Netanyahu talk America into yet another Middle East war.” In the op-ed, Tierney recalls what it was like watching Netanyahu testify before the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in 2002 in the lead-up to the 2003 invasion. Tierney was in the minority of Representatives and Senators who voted against the war in Iraq.

“As we stare at the abyss of another possible war in the Middle East, Netanyahu’s breathless 2002 testimony should serve as a reminder to avoid advice from the congenitally wrong, no matter how certain they may seem,” he wrote. “He was wrong then and he is wrong now.”

NO, NEWT GINGRICH, WE SHOULDN’T NUKE THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ

Former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich said last week that the United States should use “a dozen thermonuclear detonations” to “cut a new channel” instead of fighting over the Strait of Hormuz. This is, of course, ridiculous and we had to call it out on social media by updating a graphic we made back in 2019 when President Trump suggested nuking hurricanes. While these suggestions are absurd, they represent a flippancy about nuclear weapons that is unacceptable from anyone, much less from elected officials, past or present.

FRANCE TO INCREASE ARSENAL, EXTEND DETERRENCE ACROSS EUROPE

French President Emmanuel Macron has declared that “the next 50 years will be an era of nuclear weapons” while announcing that France would increase its nuclear arsenal, launch a new nuclear-armed submarine, extend deterrence to eight European countries and stop sharing information about the size of its arsenal. France currently has about 290 nuclear weapons in its arsenal, which it can launch by air or sea. The only other nuclear power in Europe, the United Kingdom, has about 225 nuclear weapons, all sea-based. 

This announcement from France is alarming, but it is not surprising. President Trump’s verbal attacks on NATO in his first term led European countries to question the reliability of the U.S. nuclear umbrella that has covered Europe for decades and fueled discussions on the strength of Europe’s own nuclear deterrent. In his second term, Trump’s increasingly antagonistic verbal attacks on NATO and European allies became more frequent and angry — including lashing out at them for not supporting the U.S. efforts in Iran — and we told you last month that Germany, Poland and Sweden had discussed changes to the European deterrent specifically because of a loss of trust in the United States.

Last year, Research Analyst Connor Murray and then-Scoville Fellow Marlena Broeker wrote in Just Security that doubts concerning U.S. reliability should not lead to a European nuclear deterrent following similar conversations at the Munich Security Conference in 2025. A European deterrent would be “economically, technically and politically inadvisable,” they write.

RUSSIA-UKRAINE TALKS STALLED AMID IRAN WAR, AS UKRAINE HELPS COUNTRIES DEFEND AGAINST IRAN

Diplomatic efforts to end Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine have been paused amid the war in Iran, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Ukrainian negotiators will ask for at least an approximation of dates for the next round of talks with Russia when they meet with the United States this weekend. The war has now entered its fifth year. 

Meanwhile, Ukraine is helping five Middle Eastern and Gulf countries counter Iranian drone attacks. Ukraine has gained expertise in defending itself against Russian drones. Iran and Russia signed a cooperation agreement last year, but Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to stop sharing intelligence with Iran if the United States cut off its support of Ukraine — a proposal the United States rejected.

NORTH KOREA FIRES MISSILES IN RESPONSE TO U.S.-SOUTH KOREA EXERCISE

On March 14, North Korea fired an estimated 10 ballistic missiles toward the Eastern Sea, likely in reaction to joint military exercise between South Korea and the United States. This was the country’s third ballistic missile launch since the start of the year. These tests are utilized by North Korea not just as symbolic tools but to test a wide range of ballistic and cruise missiles in a push to develop the means to deliver nuclear weapons.

GABBARD NAMES PAKISTAN AS THREAT BUT EXPERTS DISAGREE

On March 18, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard presented the 2026 Annual Threat Assessment to the Senate Intelligence Committee during which she cited concern that Pakistan’s long-range ballistic missile development could potentially include intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) capable of striking the United States. Experts have pushed back on this assessment, which seems to have little, if any, supporting evidence and runs contrary to Pakistan’s long-standing India-specific nuclear doctrine. Jalil Abbas Jilani, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington, responded that “Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine is India-specific, aimed at maintaining credible deterrence in South Asia, not projecting power globally.”

WHAT A WORLD WITHOUT ARMS CONTROL GETS YOU

Last week, the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee heard from top Pentagon officials about the strategic forces’ posture in fiscal year 2027. If there was previously any doubt, the testimony underscored our current environment without strategic arms limitation treaties. Pentagon civilian officials were joined by commanders from U.S. Space Command, Strategic Command and Northern Command to talk about why they believe the Golden Dome missile defense program is essential and why the current nuclear modernization progress, which costs U.S. taxpayers a minimum of $100 billion each year, is the absolute minimum necessary to keep us safe. 

Most members of the subcommittee were seemingly disinterested in asking any difficult questions of the witnesses regarding cost overruns, schedule delays and actual strategic necessity of continued reliance on nuclear weapons.

PENTAGON BEGINS TO ADMIT GOLDEN DOME ESTIMATE IS LUDICROUS

Space Force General Michael Guetlein, the Pentagon official overseeing President Donald Trump’s so-called Golden Dome missile defense shield, offered the first signs that the program will cost more than originally estimated. Gen. Guetlein said the “objective architecture” will cost $185 billion, a $10 billion increase over President Trump’s earlier estimate. Neither of these estimates will come close to the total cost if we are to believe the administration’s stated goals for the Golden Dome. Our fact sheet on the Golden Dome explains its origins, concept, technical infeasibility and why it’s different from Israel’s Iron Dome. 

Executive Director John Tierney, who held hearings on ballistic missile defense for years while in Congress, told CNN last year that the Golden Dome is “a joke. It’s basically a scam. Strategically, it doesn’t make any sense. Technically, it doesn’t make any sense. Economically, it doesn’t make any sense.”

NEW LEGISLATION SEEKS TO LIMIT AI-NUCLEAR INTEGRATION

Last week, Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) introduced the AI Guardrails Act to establish clear limits on the Pentagon’s uses of artificial intelligence (AI). The legislation goes slightly further than the established “human in the loop” policies about nuclear weapons to prohibit the Department of Defense from using AI to launch or detonate nuclear weapons or use autonomous weapons systems for lethal force without “appropriate levels” of human involvement. It also prohibits the DoD from using AI for domestic mass surveillance.

FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA

We are on X (formerly known as Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, Threads and Bluesky. Follow us for the latest national security and nuclear weapons news on your favorite platforms

CONSIDER BECOMING A MONTHLY OR ROUND-UP DONOR

With only a few clicks today, you can set the Center up for long-term success by setting up monthly donations. You could also consider making a one-time gift or joining our round-up program through which you can donate change from your purchases, up to your pre-set amount, each month.