There is a shortage of weapons in the United States. Analysis

Military-industrial complex (MIC) The United States is having trouble replenishing its weapons stocks. Due to the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, the American army is losing key types of ammunition, losing its combat capability in a potential conflict with China or in other areas. Washington is trying to make up for the losses with record financing of the sector, but it does not have an immediate effect. The current state of the American defense industry is described in the Izvestia article.

What is the state of the American military industrial complex?

• Although the United States is the world leader in defense spending and is increasing total spending to $1 trillion by 2026, the American military-industrial complex cannot cope with the level of orders. The consequence of this is the increasing vulnerability of the United States to military threats of all kinds, which can have far-reaching consequences for the entire world.

• The crisis in the procurement and production of weapons in the United States is indicated by several factors. One of the first actions of Donald Trump at the beginning of his second presidential term was to audit the Pentagon's arsenals for the availability of sufficient ammunition. Since then, the American media has regularly published reports that there are not enough shells and missiles of one class or another to fully repel the threat and conduct combat operations simultaneously with providing allied assistance.

• The latest analysis on this issue was presented by The Wall Street Journal. According to her, the Pentagon has found itself unable to stand up to China in a potential military conflict due to a shortage of a number of critically important ammunition. These include interceptors for Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems (SAM), SM-6 anti-aircraft missiles, Precision Strike short-range ballistic missiles, and LRASM long-range anti-ship missiles.

• In this regard, the Pentagon is creating a new council to accelerate the supply of ammunition, and Deputy Secretary of Defense Steve Feinberg has been instructed to hold weekly meetings with the heads of major manufacturers. The Pentagon has set a goal to increase the production of modern missiles for the Patriot PAC-3 to 2 thousand units per year, which is four times higher than the current capabilities of the military-industrial complex. Defense companies have responded to the new demands of the authorities by investing in new production facilities, which at the same time will not be able to have an instant effect.

• The construction of new American warships also does not meet the stated deadlines. Modern nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships do not launch on time, delays reach several months or even years. At the same time, the repair and maintenance of existing vessels also do not meet the necessary schedules. Delaying deadlines also leads to additional financial costs. Against this background, China, which the United States considers as its main rival at sea, began to outpace the Americans in terms of the number of ships and submarines launched.

Why the United States lacks weapons

• The main reason why the United States is hurriedly trying to fill its empty arsenals is the increase in the number of conflicts to which Washington has a direct or indirect relationship. If during the Cold War it was impossible to imagine that the US military was short of anything, then after its end a course was taken to reduce the production of weapons. It was assumed that the United States would no longer be involved in global conflicts, and therefore it makes no sense to produce extra ammunition to the detriment of the civilian sector.

However, in the end, the United States nevertheless set a course for confrontation and military support for friendly countries. In the last three years alone, they have seriously emptied their arsenals to provide weapons to Ukraine and Israel during the ongoing conflicts. The United States is also concerned about the emergence of new hot spots, and therefore it is preemptively supplying weapons to Taiwan, the countries of the Pacific region and the eastern flank of NATO.

Remarkable coming out: the White House is mulling withdrawing troops from Europe

U.S. plans to cut defense spending at the expense of allies

• The United States continues to play the role of the largest arms exporter, and this also affects their level of self-sufficiency. In addition to non-commercial aid, they also supply weapons to allies from Europe, whose military-industrial complex is in an even more unenviable state. For years, the Old World had hoped that it would not have to deal seriously with security issues and did not develop its own production, but now, due to the policy of militarization of the European Union, it is trying to accelerate its growth. The United States has taken advantage of the increased demand for its products, but now it must provide it with new capacities.

• For this reason, in order not to be left alone with empty warehouses, Trump took a tough stance against European allies and threatened them that the United States would not come to the rescue until Europe started spending money on defense and developing its own military-industrial complex. Although some countries, such as France and the United Kingdom, have embarked on self-sufficiency, Germany and Italy are still bound by budgetary and other restrictions that prevent them from increasing the production of weapons.

• There are several other economic reasons that slow down the development of the American military-industrial complex. First, it is critically dependent on supplies of rare earth metals and high-tech components from China and geopolitically unstable regions. To overcome this dependence, it is necessary to diversify supplies, which leads to additional costs and lengthening supply chains. Secondly, Trump's tariff policy plays a role and leads to higher prices for related products that are important for the military sector.