(FORTUNE Magazine) – Even as Belgrade burns, peace has broken out in the most unlikely place: Washington. For a generation, politicians have fought bitterly over defense spending. The debate was stark-- Republicans wanted to spend more, Democrats less--and it left both parties bloodied. But suddenly both sides have pronounced the war over and declared victory. Now everyone supports more Pentagon spending.

Why, with Washington willing to fight about the smallest thing, is there a truce over the biggest discretionary element of the budget? "The facts," says Democratic Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, "have actually changed the politics." Specifically, this fact: Between 1986 and 1998, the number of American deployments per year has nearly tripled, from 26 to 68. As a result, Congress, though divided over whether American bombs and missiles should have been loosed in Yugoslavia, nonetheless will almost certainly agree to President Clinton's request to increase defense spending by $112 billion over the next six years.

It's not easy being the only superpower on the planet. At one point in 1998, American naval forces were deployed in Operation Desert Thunder (involving Iraq), Operation Resolute Response (following terrorist bombings in Kenya and Tanzania), Operation Safe Departure (strife in Eritrea), Operation Determined Falcon (unrest in Kosovo), Operation Bevel Incline (rioting in Indonesia), and operations Deliberate Guard and Joint Guard (enforcing the no-fly zone in the Balkans). U.S. military forces were also sent to Albania, Italy, Congo, and the Caribbean. "Our soldiers are smart, hard-working, and dedicated," General Dennis J. Reimer, the U.S. Army chief of staff, told lawmakers. "They are also very tired."

In truth, the whole military system is stressed out, including the machinery. Most of America's planes and ships were built between the late '70s and the late '80s. But some equipment is older. The Marine Corps' key weapon--the assault amphibious vehicle--is 27 years old. Current plans call for Marine KC-130F refuelers to fly until 2024, when the aircraft will be 63 years old; Dr. Strangelove-era Air Force B-52s are supposed to last until 2039. "People out in the field are asking for bayonets and bullets and spare parts," says Defense Secretary William Cohen.

Readiness isn't the only problem. Recruitment is off, too, at a time when the number of people in the military is just 1.4 million, down more than a third from the end of the Cold War. A decade ago a larger military was designed to take on a single enemy at a time. Now a smaller military is being asked to prepare for nukes--in addition to mere nuisances--around the globe. "It causes lots of strains, making it harder to retain troops and harder for the troops we have to be trained for other operations," says Richard Haas, a Brookings Institution scholar who was a top adviser to President Bush during the Gulf war. Some troops performing skilled jobs, such as flying an AWACS plane over the Gulf, spend 200 days a year away from home.

With the Pentagon finally in the position the rest of the government has been in since the Reagan years--scrounging for money--Cohen set out to argue for more. He arranged for Clinton to talk to top generals and admirals at the National Defense University, and followed up with a White House meeting with service chiefs last Pearl Harbor Day. The generals and admirals had a good case. They won the argument--and won over the Democrats.

DAVID SHRIBMAN is Washington bureau chief of the Boston Globe and a Pulitzer Prize-winning political reporter.