The United States has expended large quantities of missiles and advanced interceptors during its military campaign against Iran, raising domestic concerns that a prolonged withdrawal could complicate Washington’s ability to quickly respond to a future crisis involving China and Taiwan, according to multiple US officials and new strategic assessments.This issue has emerged as one of the most important hidden costs of the Iranian conflict. While the US military maintains an overwhelming global force and officials insist that preparedness remains sound, analysts warn that depleted missile stockpiles in the Middle East could take years to rebuild, creating what some describe as temporary weakness in the Indo-Pacific region.At the heart of the concern is not the number of troops or the number of aircraft, but rather the ammunition.
Modern warfare is increasingly defined by access to precision missiles, interceptors, and industrial production capacity. A Navy that does not have enough air defense interceptors, or an Air Force that suffers from a lack of long-range offensive weapons, could see its advantages on the battlefield diminish rapidly.
What did the United States use in the Iran war?
Since the conflict with Iran began on February 28, the United States has launched more than 1,000 Tomahawk cruise missiles and between 1,500 and 2,000 major air defense interceptors, including THAAD, Patriot and Standard systems, according to US officials cited in Washington.
These weapons are among the most advanced and most valuable American weapons from a strategic perspective. Not only are they being used in Middle East operations, they are also being used in the Pentagon’s planning for any major conflict with China.Replacement of such stocks is not immediate. Officials say it could take up to six years to fully rebuild some stockpiles, depending on the system, industrial capacity and congressional funding.This has led to discussions within the administration about whether operational plans for Taiwan and the Western Pacific may need adjustments if a near-term emergency arises.
Why does Taiwan matter in this discussion?
American defense planners have long treated a potential conflict between China and Taiwan as one of the most difficult military scenarios America could face.China has a rapidly expanding military, including a navy, missile and drone systems, and more than 600 nuclear warheads, according to recent Pentagon assessments. Any war over Taiwan would likely require massive amounts of long-range offensive missiles, sea-based interceptors, and air defense systems.Many of the same weapons now used against Iran would be necessary in such a scenario.That creates a fundamental dilemma, strategists say: Every missile launched in one theater is unavailable in another theater until it can be replaced.The US intelligence community reportedly estimated in March that Beijing was unlikely to wage war on Taiwan in 2027 and had no specific timeline for unification, although China still seeks sovereign control of the island by 2049.There is no sign of an imminent conflict. But defense planning depends as much on ability as on intention.
The White House dismisses concerns about preparedness
Senior Trump administration officials have responded forcefully to claims that the Iran war weakened US preparedness.“The entire premise of this story is wrong,” White House press secretary Carolyn Leavitt said.She added: “The United States of America has the most powerful army in the world, fully equipped with enough weapons and ammunition, stored here at home and around the world, to effectively defend the homeland and carry out any military operation directed by the Supreme Commander.”The Pentagon’s chief spokesman, Sean Parnell, also dismissed suggestions of tension, saying the military “has everything it needs to execute at a time and place of the president’s choosing.”Officials also believe that production can be accelerated through investment, reform of the procurement system, and expansion of manufacturing.
Pacific Commander says there is no immediate cost
Adm. Samuel Paparo, who would oversee any major war in the Pacific, told lawmakers this week that ongoing operations in the Middle East also give U.S. forces valuable combat experience.“Right now, I don’t see any real cost being imposed on our ability to deter China,” Paparo told the Senate Armed Services Committee.This view reflects the Pentagon’s general confidence that current stocks remain adequate.However, analysts point out that adequate deterrence today is different from ideal deterrence for a protracted, multi-theater war tomorrow.
CSIS Warning: Years to rebuild stocks
A new report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies has echoed concerns about shrinking stocks.Based on pre-war estimates, the research center said that munitions used in the Iran war could reach the following:
- Approximately 27% of tomahawk stocks
- About 36% of JASSM missiles are long-range
- About a third of the SM-6 missiles
- Nearly half of the SM-3 interceptors
- More than two-thirds of the Patriot interceptors
- More than 80% of THAAD interceptor missiles
This means that the deeper pressure may be on defensive systems rather than offensive weapons.“It will be years before we can rebuild those stocks,” said Mark Cancian, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.The report also warned that high spending rates created a “window of increasing vulnerability in the Western Pacific.”
Why is missile defense more important?
Much public attention focuses on aircraft carriers or stealth bombers, but wars are often limited by the availability of missiles.A destroyer was detected without interceptions. A Patriot battery without reloading has limited value. Fighters without long-range missiles must fly close to the danger.This is particularly important in any conflict in the Pacific, where Chinese military doctrine emphasizes denial of access to the region.
This strategy relies on missiles designed to keep American ships and aircraft at a distance.To counter this, the United States will need large numbers of interceptor missiles and precision weapons.“The United States will have to fight China in a way that may be more costly and risky for American forces,” said Kelly Greco of the Stimson Center.“It will take a higher drain.”
The Pentagon’s response: Build more, faster
The Pentagon is now moving to expand production and replenish stocks.
The White House has reportedly asked Congress to approve $350 billion for critical munitions in the fiscal 2027 budget. Defense companies RTX and Lockheed Martin have signed agreements to sharply increase production.Lockheed said it would quadruple production of Patriot missiles, THAAD and PAC-3 missiles. RTX said it will accelerate deliveries of Tomahawk missiles, AMRAAM air-to-air missiles and standard missile variants.The Pentagon also reached out to American automakers and industrial manufacturers to help expand wartime production capacity.“Our goal is simple: convert the entire acquisition system to operate on a wartime basis,” US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last year.
Trump says the arsenal is still deep
President Donald Trump has dismissed concerns about supply restrictions and recently claimed that the United States maintains an “almost unlimited supply of medium and high-end munitions.”At the same time, he warned that bombing operations against Iran could resume if Tehran refuses to reach an agreement on its nuclear program.This creates a strategic paradox for Washington. Maybe lol The United States must continue to strike Iran in the near term. But each additional week of conflict consumes advanced missiles needed for deterrence elsewhere.
