\n<\/p>\n
WASHINGTON — <\/span>U.S. military contractors need at least three years to replenish stockpiles of three key weapons systems used heavily in the Iran war<\/a>, according to an analysis released Wednesday, adding to concerns<\/a> that American forces would have limited firepower in any future conflict with China<\/a>. <\/p>\n The weapons systems are Tomahawk cruise missiles<\/a>, which are used to strike targets deep inside enemy territory, and Patriot<\/a> and THAAD interceptors<\/a> that defend against incoming missiles and drones. <\/p>\n \u201cThe United States has enough munitions for any plausible scenario in the Iran war, but the depleted inventories have created a window of vulnerability for a potential Western Pacific conflict,\u201d the Center for Strategic and International Studies said in its new report<\/a>. \u201cThe time needed to rebuild those inventories has thus become a major concern.\u201d<\/p>\n China has a stated goal<\/a> of ensuring its military is capable of taking Taiwan<\/a> by force if necessary by 2027, which experts see as more aspirational than a hard deadline. But Chinese President Xi Jinping warned this month that if Washington mishandles its relations with the self-governing island, the U.S. and China could end up clashing or even in open conflict<\/a>.<\/p>\n The analysis by the Washington think tank factors in the Republican Trump administration’s historic defense budget proposal of $1.5 trillion for 2027<\/a>, which significantly accelerates spending on high-end munitions that began during the Democratic Biden administration. While there’s bipartisan agreement in Congress to boost inventories, \u201cthe problem today isn\u2019t money; it\u2019s time,\u201d the report said. <\/p>\n \u201cIt takes time to expand production capacity and to build these complex systems,\u201d the report said, adding that the window of vulnerability will last \u201cfor several years until inventories return to their previous levels and another several years before they get to the levels that war planners desire.\u201d <\/p>\n Although munitions inventories are classified, CSIS said sufficient public information exists in Pentagon budget materials to estimate production timelines.<\/p>\n President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth<\/a> have insisted the U.S. is capable of fighting any war. They have pushed defense contractors to speed up munitions production, with Hegseth telling lawmakers last month that military spending under Trump will help manufacturers double or even triple their capacities.<\/p>\n Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement that the military \u201chas everything it needs to execute at the time and place of the President\u2019s choosing.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWe have executed multiple successful operations across combatant commands while ensuring the U.S. military possesses a deep arsenal of capabilities to protect our people and our interests,\u201d Parnell said. <\/p>\n Some military experts have pushed back. Pentagon officials \u201cknew the reality of our military stockpiles and hopefully told someone, \u2018Hey, if we go to this fight, even in the most conservative estimates, we are drawing down our stockpiles to a critical level,\u2019\u201d said Virginia Burger, a senior defense policy analyst at the Project On Government Oversight watchdog group and a former Marine officer. <\/p>\n Concerns about diminished stockpiles were a theme at recent congressional hearings<\/a>. For Democrats, the munitions supply is a damning metric against the Iran war, which Trump launched without lawmakers’ approval. Some Republicans argue that the problem stems from the U.S. sending Patriot missile defense systems to Ukraine<\/a> after Russia invaded in 2022, although several American allies use those systems.<\/p>\n The roots of the predicament can be traced to the end of the Cold War<\/a>, said Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and senior adviser at CSIS who co-authored the study with research associate Chris H. Park. <\/p>\n After the fall of the Soviet Union<\/a> in late 1991, the U.S. assumed future wars would be short and regional with little need for large numbers of such high-end weapons, Cancian said in an interview. The Pentagon ordered relatively low numbers, assuming the military would not need many of them. Military contractors responded in kind, relying on a relatively small manufacturing footprint to build them. <\/p>\n