Trump proposes ending Pentagon programs training European armies against Russia

In September 2025, the Trump administration's FY2026 budget request proposed eliminating two Pentagon programs that train Eastern European militaries to defend against Russian aggression: the Security Cooperation programs authorized under Section 333 of the National Defense Authorization Act, and the Baltic Security Initiative, which specifically funds military training and equipment for Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania — NATO's frontline states bordering Russia. Together, the programs had disbursed roughly $200 million per year since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The administration's rationale was that European nations should bear a greater share of their own defense costs. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had said publicly that the U.S. should not be the 'world's policeman' and that NATO allies needed to reach the alliance's 2% GDP defense spending target before asking for American training support. Baltic state defense spending was already at or above 3% of GDP — among the highest in NATO — when the proposal was announced.

Congress pushed back immediately and with unusual bipartisan force. The Senate Armed Services Committee, led by RWRoger Wicker (R-MS), included full restoration of the Baltic Security Initiative in its version of the FY2026 National Defense Authorization Act. In December 2025, the final NDAA authorized $175 million for the Baltic Security Initiative through 2028 — a three-year commitment that directly overrode the administration's proposed phase-out.

The three Baltic states — Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania — have been among the most vocal advocates for a strong U.S. presence in Eastern Europe since Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea. All three have significant Russian-speaking minorities and share direct land or sea borders with Russia or Russian ally Belarus. Their defense establishments have integrated U.S. training doctrine so extensively that eliminating the programs mid-cycle would require years of retraining and reorganization.

The proposed cut came as the Trump administration was simultaneously pressuring Ukraine to accept a ceasefire on terms that would leave Russia in control of territories it had seized since 2022. European allies interpreted the Baltic Security Initiative proposal as a signal that the U.S. was preparing to reduce its security commitments more broadly — and that the administration's definition of 'Europe defending itself' meant the U.S. stepping back entirely rather than restructuring burden-sharing.

Section 333 security assistance covers a broader portfolio than just the Baltic states

It funds U.S. military training for partner nations in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia as well as Europe

Eliminating it entirely would have ended dozens of programs used to build partner capacity in countries where the U.S. has strategic interests but does not station permanent forces The administration did not propose replacing it with any alternative mechanism.

The Senate's restoration of the Baltic Security Initiative in the NDAA was a direct rebuke of Hegseth's stated policy priorities — and was led by Republicans, not Democrats. Wicker had previously worked closely with the administration on other defense priorities. The bipartisan vote underscored that congressional defense hawks viewed the Baltic program cuts as a genuine threat to NATO cohesion, not simply a budget line to renegotiate.

The episode illustrates a recurring constitutional tension: the president proposes the federal budget and sets military priorities through the commander-in-chief power, but Congress appropriates all defense spending and authorizes programs through the NDAA. When the two branches disagree on security commitments, Congress has the power of the purse — and in this case it used it.