Hegseth and Caine Get Grilled Again on Iran War Costs and War Powers

For the second day in a row, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Cain faced public questioning from lawmakers. This time it was the Senate Armed Forces Committee’s turn, following a House hearing the day before. It was the first time the pair had been publicly questioned since the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran on February 28.

The tone was, at moments, bellicose. Hegseth repeatedly went after war critics — including lawmakers — accusing them of “fecklessly” aiding US enemies. He delivered another defence of the conflict, even as Pentagon officials revealed the war has so far cost the US at least $25bn. On next steps, with fighting paused and talks with Iran stalled, there was little clarity.

Here is how the key moments played out.

One major criticism of the war has been the strain on US munitions. Hegseth batted that away, maintaining that the stockpile remained “in good shape”. That claim runs against a series of reports suggesting otherwise. Some lawmakers have charged that depleted munitions could leave the US vulnerable in other theatres. The New York Times reported last week that the number of expensive long-range stealth and Patriot interceptor missiles used so far has forced the military to surge weapons and hardware from other regions. Meanwhile, Pentagon officials told lawmakers the US had spent $25bn since the war began but were unclear whether that included damage to US assets in the Middle East.

The top US general made a glancing admission that Russia has assisted Iran in the current war, but gave few details. “There’s definitely some action there,” Caine said, suggesting he could not reveal more in a public setting. Russia and Iran have long traded weapons, and Moscow has offered political support to Tehran during the war. Concrete details of support throughout the conflict, however, have been sparse. Earlier this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin again voiced support for Iran during a meeting in St Petersburg with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi.

Friday marks 60 days since Trump officially notified Congress of the US attacks on Iran. Under the 1973 War Powers Act, the president is legally required to halt the operation or get congressional approval to continue. Hegseth offered a novel interpretation: the “60-day clock pauses, or stops” during a pause in fighting. The US and Iran have mostly paused attacks since April 8 ahead of ceasefire talks, which have since stalled. The US has continued its naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, with Trump repeatedly threatening to renew attacks.

The language of the War Powers Act does not explicitly say the 60-day timeline changes due to a pause in fighting. Senator Tim Kaine, a Democrat, responded warily:

“I don’t believe the statute would support that.”

Before the war launched, the Pentagon had reportedly moved to roll back some offices involved with oversight of civilian harm in conflict. That included staffing drains at the Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, which was meant to assess lessons from the high civilian death toll during the US “global war on terror”. Questions have been raised over reported civilian deaths in Iran, including a US strike on a girls’ school in Minab.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand asked Hegseth directly:

“What is your response to targeting that has resulted in the destruction of schools, hospitals, civilian places? Why did you cut by 90 percent the division that’s supposed to help you not target civilians?”

Republican Mike Rounds followed up, asking if the Pentagon still has the resources to protect civilians. Hegseth maintained the department still has “every resource necessary” to do so.

Some of the harshest questions came from Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the committee. Hegseth has reportedly been one of the staunchest supporters of the war behind the scenes, which Reed said raised questions over the counsel he was giving the president. “I am concerned that you have been telling the president what he wants to hear, instead of what he needs to hear,” Reed said at one point. In another exchange, Reed said he believed Hegseth was “causing lasting harm to the military”.

Hegseth, meanwhile, again took aim at lawmakers, particularly Democrats, who have questioned the war and its aims. “As I said yesterday, and I’ll say it again today, the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless naysayers and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans,” Hegseth said in his opening statement.