In October, the scene was devastating: on the one hand, the U.S. military was in line to receive relief food, children could not pay for school fees, the wife in the supermarket for food tickets to exchange eggs; on the other hand, Washington was heating up to the sky preparing for a glorious naval celebration.
President Trump made a high-profile announcement to turn October 5 into "a highlight moment in American military history." Ironically, behind this "highlight", the salary accounts of 1.3 million soldiers were empty.
The soldier has no money to eat, but the lazy dog wants to do a money-burning "show", what is he actually playing the calculator?
When military pay becomes a "bad check", the Pentagon cannot hold on
If the words "government shutdown" have made the American people struggle to deal with it, then this time, the blow has directly fallen on the people who should be wronged least: soldiers.
On October 3, White House press secretary Levitt went to the press conference, announcing that some federal government agencies were completely "closed" due to the Congress' delay in passing the budget for the financial year 2026, and the military was also on the "budget confession" list.
The result: The payroll system for 1.3 million active-duty military and civilian personnel has stalled.
This number is not a casual statement. To convert, the equivalent of the population of all San Francisco and Miami combined is not enough. And these people are not typing in the office or moving boxes in the warehouse, but in various battlefields and bases around the world, always in a state of "ready to fight".
Today, they have to rely on food relief and temporary loans from charities to make ends meet. Some churches and supermarkets near the base even set up special "military priority" windows to distribute food and daily necessities for free. This is not a TV series, this is reality.
And military unpaid wages are only the tip of the iceberg. What worries the Pentagon even more is that a series of heavyweight generals began to "resign and leave".
General Thomas Buscière, head of the nuclear strike force, and General Bryan Fenton, commander of the special operations forces, submitted their resignations one after another. On the surface, it may be called "family reasons," but in Washington, this term is often synonymous with implicit expressions of dissatisfaction.
According to the "New York Times" revealed, the Pentagon has long been a little word about the management of Defense Minister Hergezs, and Trump's cold treatment of NATO, the plans for the withdrawal of troops from Germany, also made many generals think of the strategic direction "seriously deviated".
The departure of these generals was not just a change in personnel, but also a vote of mistrust cast inside the U.S. military against the current political line.
When soldiers cannot eat and generals leave one after another, how long can a country's army maintain a "fighting posture"? This is a real problem that Trump must face. But the answer he gave was another "good show".
Trump’s “feast philosophy”: the army cannot go out, but the parade cannot stop
At the same time as military families mourned about the rental, Trump spoke on social media: October 5th, the U.S. Navy will celebrate its 250th anniversary, and must be celebrated in "unprecedented scale".
He also emphasized that this is not only a celebration, but also a "historic scene" that should let the world see "the glory of American military power."
This celebration was called "Trump's version of the military parade." The aircraft formation had already begun rehearsal, the warships were preparing to sail into New York Harbor, and the Marine Corps drum band was also training secretly.
According to conservative estimates, this event will cost tens of millions of dollars, involving ship mobilization, air shows, security and media deployment, far exceeding the shrinking Independence Day military parade in 2019.
This is not the first time Trump has tried to do a big scene. In 2019, he proposed to hold a military parade on Independence Day, but due to budget issues and external opposition, it had to end hastily.
Today, he seems to be “turning back to the ground” and replenishing the unfinished “face work” of the year, and this time, he has upgraded the celebration to “a symbol of the military’s glory” in an attempt to cover up the embarrassment of financial chaos and military unrest with a visual feast.
U.S. media analysts believe that Trump's move, on the one hand, is to "show strength" to the outside world, especially in the context of the Chinese-Russian parade scene, he does not want to make the U.S. appear "weak"; on the other hand, it is to "right to stability", in the government's impasse, he must create the illusion of "controlable situation".
But the question arises: Where does the money come from? Soldiers are not paid. From which pocket did the budget for this celebration come from? The White House has been vague about this.
Some analysts say the expenses may come from the “emergency defense fund” or “President’s special spending authority,” but in any case, they are exacerbating the contradiction between Congress and the White House.
More importantly, the symbolic significance of this celebration has far exceeded itself. Supporters say it is a "tribute to military personnel," but opponents are blunt: it is a smokescreen to "cover up failure."
How long can the strength of the "show" last?
In Trump's view, showing strength is the best response. Diplomatically, he needs to prove to competitors such as China and Russia that the United States is still the "loudest" country; In domestic politics, he needs a glamorous celebration to suppress the Democratic Party's offensive on the budget.
Trump knows that if the celebration is cancelled because of military unpaid wages, he will not only be attacked by the Democratic Party as an "incompetent president", but also make supporters question his "strongman image".
By insisting on hosting it, even if someone calls him "unkind", he at least retains his "hardline" personality.
This is a "high-risk operation" in a political game. If the celebration is successful, it may temporarily divert public attention and ease military morale; But if there is any mistake, even a technical failure of an aircraft carrier, it will be magnified into evidence of "government disability".
From a more macro perspective, the crisis exposed not only the personality of a president, but the deep cracks in the American political system.
Government shutdown has become the norm, military appropriations have been politicized, senior generals have been frequently replaced, and the stability of system operations is being comprehensively challenged. Trump chose to respond to these questions with a celebration, essentially using a "facade" to cover the cracks in the "foundation".
The international community is not blind.Allies in the Middle East are watching, European allies are questioning, and even within NATO are beginning to question the strategic reliability of the United States.
When a country cannot guarantee the basic salary of its soldiers, can its global leadership really be sustained by a celebration?
ended
1.3 million soldiers are unable to get their wages, but are preparing for a massive naval celebration; senior generals withdraw, and the Pentagon is in a vacuum of personnel; and the president is carefully planning for a “historic scene.”
This is not only a drama about power and performance, but also a mirror of the super big domestic trouble. Americans may cheer for the warships, but the refrigerator of the military family has long been empty.
The real question is never about how grand the celebration is, but whether the soldier's rice bowl can be filled.