President Donald Trump delivered his State of the Union address on Tuesday before a joint session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol, touting a successful operation against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro with mixed messaging on the unfolding situation in Iran.
Trump, in his record-long 1 hour, 48-minute speech, discussed the January operation that resulted in Maduro’s capture, saying that “elite American warriors carried out one of the most complex spectacular feats of military competence and power in world history” and “ended the reign of outlaw dictator Nicolas Maduro.”
The speech’s Venezuela segment also paired the Maduro claim with a broader Western Hemisphere security framing that emphasized cartel pressure and fentanyl enforcement.
Trump devoted a significant portion of the address to Iran, declaring that U.S. forces had “obliterated” the country’s nuclear weapons program in the mission dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer.
“In a breakthrough operation last June, the United States military obliterated Iran’s nuclear weapons program,” he said.
My preference is to solve this problem through diplomacy. But one thing is certain—I will never allow the world’s number one sponsor of terror to have a nuclear weapon.
Trump's Mixed Iran Message
Pentagon officials previously described Operation Midnight Hammer as a strike mission that used decoys and deception and targeted 3 Iranian nuclear sites, while also stressing the United States did not seek war.
Trump did not present a battle damage assessment, satellite imagery or updated intelligence findings during the speech to detail the extent of destruction or Iran’s current enrichment capacity.
Iran has long maintained its nuclear program is for civilian energy purposes, though U.S. intelligence assessments have warned that Tehran’s uranium enrichment levels significantly shorten the breakout timeline for a potential weapon. The United States withdrew from the 2015 nuclear agreement during Trump’s first term, and subsequent efforts to restore limits on Iran’s program have stalled.
Any confirmed large-scale strike on nuclear infrastructure carries strategic risk, including potential retaliation through regional proxy groups, maritime disruption in the Persian Gulf, or direct missile exchanges involving Israel. Trump framed the operation as deterrence enforcement, signaling that U.S. red lines would be backed by force.
The remarks position Iran as a central pillar of Trump’s second-term national security posture, combining diplomatic rhetoric with a willingness to use military action.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Spending Target Raised
Trump said members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) agreed to move toward spending 5% of gross domestic product on defense, more than doubling the alliance’s longstanding 2% benchmark adopted after Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea.
“NATO countries…have just agreed at my very strong request to pay 5% of GDP for military defense rather than the 2%,” he said.
He also told lawmakers, “Everything we send over to Ukraine is sent through NATO and they pay us totally in full.”
The 2% benchmark became a focal point of alliance debates over burden-sharing, particularly as the United States has traditionally carried a disproportionate share of total NATO defense spending. Most allies reached or approached the 2% threshold only after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
A 5% target would push defense spending to levels not seen in Europe since the height of the Cold War. Analysts note that few NATO members currently approach even 4%, meaning the proposed shift would require hundreds of billions of dollars in additional long-term commitments across Europe and Canada.
NATO planning discussions around the 5% push have been framed as a major multiyear shift, with exemptions and uneven application among allies, not a uniform overnight change. The proposal is not structured as an immediate across-the-board increase.
Trump has repeatedly argued that U.S. taxpayers shoulder too much of the alliance’s defense burden. His comments during the address signaled an effort to reshape the financial balance of the alliance while maintaining collective support for Ukraine through NATO channels rather than direct bilateral transfers.
The proposal sets up continued debate within the alliance over feasibility, timelines, and the political willingness of member states to dramatically expand military spending.
Cartels Designated Terrorist Organizations
Trump also touted the formal designation of major drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and declared illicit fentanyl a weapon of mass destruction, elevating the drug crisis into the realm of national security.
“That’s why I designated these cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, and I declared illicit fentanyl a weapon of mass destruction,” he said.
Foreign terrorist organization designation expands federal authority under existing counterterrorism statutes. The label allows the Treasury Department to freeze assets, broadens criminal liability for anyone who provides material support, and increases intelligence-sharing tools across agencies. It can also carry diplomatic consequences, particularly if cartel activity intersects with foreign governments.
By labeling fentanyl a weapon of mass destruction, Trump framed the synthetic opioid—which has driven tens of thousands of overdose deaths annually in the United States—as a threat on par with unconventional weapons. The designation does not automatically trigger military action, but it strengthens the legal foundation for sanctions, financial tracking and expanded enforcement efforts.
Trump presented the move as part of a broader Western Hemisphere security strategy that treats cartel activity not only as organized crime, but as a cross-border national defense issue.
National Guard Deployment
Trump pointed to domestic troop deployments as proof that his administration is willing to use military resources to address crime and security threats at home.
“Starting last summer, I deployed our National Guard and federal law enforcement to restore law and order,” he said, citing operations in Memphis, Tennessee, New Orleans and Washington.
He claimed homicides in the nation’s capital were “down close to 100%” compared with the prior year, presenting the deployments as evidence that a visible federal security presence can reduce violent crime.
National Guard forces typically operate under state authority at the request of governors, known as state active-duty or Title 32 status. Presidents also have limited authority to federalize Guard units under Title 10 in certain circumstances, including insurrection or national emergency. Trump did not specify under which statutory authority the referenced deployments occurred.
Fallen Soldier Honored
Trump honored two West Virginia National Guard members who were attacked Nov. 26 while deployed in Washington.
Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe received a Purple Heart during the address after surviving the shooting. Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, who volunteered to extend her deployment, died on Thanksgiving Day from injuries sustained in the attack, according to the Associated Press.
Authorities charged Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan evacuee who entered the United States through Operation Allies Welcome. He has pleaded not guilty and remains in custody, according to the Associated Press.
The deployments have drawn legal scrutiny. Federal courts have considered challenges to the scope of executive authority to use Guard forces in domestic law enforcement roles, weighing constitutional limits and statutory boundaries. Appeals court rulings have allowed certain deployments to continue while litigation proceeds.
The episode underscores a broader national debate over the role of military forces in civilian security operations, particularly in major cities where crime policy traditionally falls under state and local jurisdiction.
Court fights over the scope and legality of using Guard forces for crime control in Washington have continued alongside the deployment, with judges and appeals courts weighing what authority applies and where limits may exist.
Bigger Defense Budget, 'Warrior Dividend'
Trump proposed a $1 trillion budget that would exceed the roughly $900 billion enacted for Fiscal Year 2026 and, if adopted, would represent the largest defense funding request in U.S. history.
The increase would come as the Pentagon faces rising personnel costs, nuclear modernization timelines, shipbuilding shortfalls, and expanding foreign policy commitments across Europe, the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific.
He also repeated his previous claim that U.S. forces “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear weapons program, which has brought skepticism in recent weeks considering potential U.S. intervention overseas.
“Our country is winning again,” Trump said. “We have the most powerful military on earth.”
Trump said Republicans had backed what he described as a “trillion-dollar budget,” casting it as essential to deterrence and global stability.
“We have no choice. We have to be strong,” he said. “It’s really called peace through strength.”
“I rebuilt the military in my first term. We’re going to continue to do so,” he added.
Lawmakers would still need to translate a $1 trillion figure into specific authorizations and appropriations, including operations and maintenance accounts, weapons procurement, research and development and troop pay. Congressional budget caps and deficit concerns could complicate the path forward.
Budget analysts have noted that some “$1 trillion” calculations rely on combining multiple legislative vehicles or projected supplemental funding rather than a single base budget topline, raising questions about how the figure would ultimately be structured.
The scale of the proposal signals an effort to accelerate force modernization at a time of sustained competition with China and continued instability in multiple regions.
Trump also said every service member received a $1,776 payment, dubbed the “Warrior Dividend,” and framed it as direct recognition of the force.
“Every service member recently received a warrior dividend of $1,776,” he said, explaining he added one dollar to make it “1776"—a symbolic reference to the nation’s founding year.
The payment applied broadly to active-duty personnel and eligible reserve component members, totaling roughly 1.45 million service members, according to federal guidance. At $1,776 per member, the one-time payment represented a multibillion-dollar outlay.
The Internal Revenue Service later clarified the payment should not be included as taxable income and treated it as a one-time supplement tied to housing allowance rules, not base pay, and it does not count toward retirement calculations.
Pentagon funding language around the payment has also been tied to housing-related appropriations rather than a standalone tariff-funded program, with guidance pointing service members to Leave and Earnings Statements for the one-time line item.
That distinction matters: The payment does not increase basic pay tables, does not compound in future raises and does not count toward retirement calculations or Thrift Savings Plan matching formulas.
Democrats Push Back
Democratic leaders sharply disputed Trump’s portrayal of American strength and stability, arguing that rising global tension and domestic uncertainty undercut his claims.
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat, delivered the official Democratic response late in the night after Trump's record-long address, questioning whether the president was working “to keep Americans safe, both at home and abroad.”
“We all know the answer is no,” she said.
Spanberger warned that adversaries including Russia, China and Iran remain active threats and suggested that long-term security depends on steady alliance management, predictable diplomacy, and congressional oversight rather than unilateral action.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), said the administration’s record could be summed up in three words: “Costs, chaos, corruption.”
“Never in our lifetime have we gone into a State of the Union where the president’s rhetoric and the country’s reality are so far apart,” Schumer said.
Schumer argued that sweeping defense proposals require congressional scrutiny and warned against what he described as abrupt escalations that could draw the United States into broader conflict. He pointed to ongoing war in Ukraine, tension in the Middle East and strategic competition with China as evidence that global risks remain high.
Democrats have signaled they will challenge both the size and structure of the proposed $1 trillion defense budget, particularly if increases come without offsets or clarity on how funds would be allocated across modernization, personnel and overseas commitments.
