On Wednesday, December 17, 2025, the United States Senate approved a sweeping $900 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2026, marking a record in military spending and setting the strategic priorities for the nation’s armed forces. The bill, which passed in a decisive 77-20 vote, blends President Donald Trump’s administration’s defense agenda with a host of congressional oversight provisions and reflects months of intense negotiation and compromise across party lines, according to Reuters and Al Jazeera.
The NDAA’s passage is a yearly ritual in Washington, but this year’s version stands out for both its size—an $8 billion increase over the president’s original request—and its content, which touches on everything from troop deployments abroad to contentious domestic debates over diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican, was quick to praise the bill’s alignment with the administration’s priorities. “This year’s National Defense Authorization Act helps advance President Trump and Republicans’ Peace Through Strength Agenda by codifying 15 of President Trump’s executive orders, ending woke ideology at the Pentagon, securing the border, revitalizing the defense industrial base, and restoring the warrior ethos,” Johnson said in a statement, as reported by Reuters.
Yet, for many Democrats, the bill’s focus raised concerns. Representative John Garamendi of California, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, voiced his frustration, stating, “Trump and [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth are deploying troops to our streets, carrying out extrajudicial killings, and undermining our military readiness. Congress must reassert its oversight. We need accountability — not just handouts to Trump.”
At 3,086 pages, the NDAA is a behemoth, touching nearly every aspect of U.S. military policy and spending. While it authorizes funding, actual appropriations will require separate congressional action. Still, the NDAA’s provisions signal the administration’s broader vision, not just for the military but for American society at large.
Internationally, the bill underscores a continued U.S. commitment to its allies and strategic partners. It mandates that at least 76,000 U.S. soldiers remain stationed in Europe, barring any reduction unless NATO allies are consulted and such a move is deemed in America’s national interest. Typically, U.S. troop levels in Europe range from 80,000 to 100,000. A similar provision locks in a floor of 28,500 soldiers in South Korea, reflecting bipartisan wariness about drawing down forces in key regions without careful deliberation, Al Jazeera reported.
The NDAA also reinforces U.S. support for Ukraine, authorizing $800 million under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative—split evenly over the next two years—and an additional $400 million annually to manufacture weapons for Kyiv. This sends a clear signal of ongoing congressional backing for Ukraine’s defense against Russian aggression. In the Asia Pacific, the bill provides $1 billion for the Taiwan Security Cooperation Initiative, aiming to strengthen defense ties as tensions with China persist. Israel, too, receives robust support, with $600 million authorized for security assistance, including funding for the Iron Dome missile defense system.
Domestically, the NDAA reflects a sharp turn away from DEI initiatives in the military. The Secretary of Defense is now barred from maintaining a DEI office, employing a chief diversity officer, or developing related training or strategic plans. Service academies are prohibited from considering race, sex, color, ethnicity, national origin, or religion in admissions decisions. These changes, championed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, are intended to shift the military’s culture away from what he described as “woke garbage” and toward a renewed “warrior ethos.”
Despite this, the bill does require each branch of the military to restore women’s initiative teams—service-level groups designed to identify and address issues that hinder women’s service, support recruiting and retention, and recommend policy changes. Representative Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, who introduced this provision, said, “These protections strengthen our force, our families, and our national security, and are vital under an Administration working to sideline women and erase their contributions.”
One of the most debated health care provisions concerned fertility services. TRICARE, the military’s health care program, will now only cover fertility treatments such as in vitro fertilization (IVF) for service members whose infertility was caused by a serious or severe illness or injury while on active duty. A broader provision that would have extended IVF coverage to all service members and their families was ultimately removed. Representative Sara Jacobs of California, a vocal advocate for expanded coverage, lamented, “What I hear from so many military families is that they’re basically left with three choices: either pay tens of thousands of dollars out of pocket for a chance to have a family, leave the military to find a job in the private sector that will cover it or forgo a family altogether.”
On LGBTQ+ issues, the final bill walked a careful line. While it dropped many of the most restrictive provisions from earlier drafts—including bans on gender-affirming surgeries and mental health care for transgender service members—it did prohibit transgender women at U.S. service academies from participating in women’s athletic programs. The Congressional Equality Caucus responded, “While we’re grateful that most anti-LGBTQI+ provisions were removed, the GOP kept one anti-trans provision in the final bill — and that’s one too many. We’re committed to repealing it.”
Military families will see some tangible benefits from the new law. All branches must now allow service members to take parental leave within two years of a child’s birth or adoption, and ensure that no one is penalized in performance evaluations for doing so. A 3.8 percent pay raise across the board and a 4.2 percent average increase in housing allowances aim to ease financial pressures, especially as only 37 percent of military families say their housing allowance covers their actual costs. More than $491 million is set aside for new child care centers and over $200 million for new schools for service members’ children. Yet, there was no explicit provision this year to address the persistently high unemployment rate among military spouses, a problem that has lingered for over a decade.
The NDAA also repeals the authorizations for the 1991 Gulf War and the 2003 Iraq War, a move supporters say reduces the risk of future military action without explicit congressional approval. In a significant shift, the bill permanently lifts U.S. sanctions on Syria following the removal of Bashar al-Assad from power in 2024, a move supporters argue will aid in the country’s reconstruction.
Finally, the NDAA ramps up congressional oversight of military operations, requiring more detailed reporting on U.S. strikes—particularly those targeting suspected smuggling operations in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. This comes after an incident in September where a U.S. strike killed two survivors of an earlier attack, prompting calls for greater transparency.
With the president’s signature now the only remaining step, the 2026 NDAA stands as a testament to the ongoing push and pull between national security imperatives, domestic politics, and the evolving values of the American military. The bill’s passage, while routine in process, reveals a nation still grappling with how to balance tradition, change, and the realities of a complex world.
