Pentagon asks defence firms to ramp up weapons production as Iran war drains stockpile

The US Pentagon has asked defence companies to urgently accelerate weapons production and deliveries as Washington faces growing pressure to replenish critical munitions depleted during the war with Iran, according to a memo obtained by The Washington Post. The request comes amid reports that stocks of key air-defence interceptors, including THAAD and Patriot, have fallen sharply from pre-war levels. Deputy defence secretary Steve Feinberg wrote to defence industry leaders on Wednesday, giving them 21 days to submit plans for "significantly faster, more aggressive delivery schedules and/or increased production for critical capabilities". "Years-long development timelines are unacceptable," Feinberg wrote. "We must dramatically accelerate our program schedules and expand our production capacity now." The Pentagon said the push to increase production is part of a broader effort to rebuild the US defence industrial base and is not solely a response to the five-month-old conflict with Iran. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell confirmed that Feinberg's memo was "real", saying the department was focused on accelerating munitions acquisitions to provide "the weapons our warfighters need at the pace the threat demands." At the same time, US officials have rejected suggestions that the military has run out of weapons needed for current operations. Jarred Conley, principal deputy director at the Defence Department's Defence Innovation Unit, told Al Jazeera that US stocks remained adequate. "We have sufficient munitions for the task at hand. The department has everything it needs today to execute a war," Conley said. The conflicting assessments reflect the central issue facing Washington: the US may still have enough weapons to conduct current operations, but replacing the large quantities of sophisticated missiles already used could take years. Why is the Pentagon asking for faster production? The latest directive comes after months of intensive military operations that have placed pressure on US stocks of precision weapons and missile interceptors. The US has relied heavily on systems such as Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defence, or THAAD, to protect American forces and allies from Iranian missiles and drones. At the same time, American forces have used long-range strike weapons during offensive operations. The concern is not simply whether the US has enough weapons for the immediate conflict. Defence planners are also looking at whether Washington would have sufficient stocks if another major crisis erupted soon after the Iran war. A recent analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, or CSIS, warned that depleted inventories could force the US and its Middle Eastern allies to take greater risks in defending against incoming missiles and drones. For example, forces could be forced to use fewer interceptors against some incoming threats in order to conserve supplies, increasing the possibility that a missile or drone could get through. The Pentagon's latest directive is therefore aimed at tackling both the immediate replenishment problem and the longer-term production capacity of the US defence industry. How badly have US missile stocks been depleted? The exact size of America's current weapons inventories is classified. However, CSIS has estimated the depletion of some of the most important missile-defence systems using procurement data, production figures and publicly available information. THAAD: One of the biggest concernsThe Terminal High Altitude Area Defence system is designed to intercept ballistic missiles at high altitudes before they reach their targets. CSIS estimated that the US had about 452 THAAD interceptors before the war. The stockpile fell to between 232 and 262 by the start of the April ceasefire. Some replenishment subsequently took place, taking the estimated inventory to between 234 and 278 interceptors. Even so, the stockpile remains at least 38% below its pre-war level, according to the CSIS figures cited by AP. A separate CNN report cited sources as saying the US had used nearly four-fifths of its THAAD inventory compared with pre-war levels. The differing estimates reflect the difficulty of assessing current stocks because official figures are not publicly disclosed. The key point is that THAAD inventories have come under heavy pressure and rebuilding them will take time. Patriot: Stocks also sharply lowerThe Patriot system is another crucial part of the US missile-defence network. CSIS estimated that the US had around 2,330 Patriot interceptors before the war. That number fell to about 1,030 by the April ceasefire. Following subsequent fighting, the estimated stockpile dropped further to between 759 and 827 interceptors. That represents a decline of at least 65% from the pre-war level, according to the CSIS assessment cited by AP. Patriot systems are particularly important because they are not required only by the US military. American allies, including Ukraine and several Middle Eastern countries, also depend on the system. This means Washington faces competing demands for a limited number of interceptors. What about Tomahawk and other offensive missiles? The pressure extends beyond missile-defence systems. The US has also used large numbers of long-range precision weapons during the conflict with Iran. Among them are Tomahawk cruise missiles, which are launched from ships and submarines and are designed to strike targets deep inside enemy territory. According to the CSIS assessment cited in the supplied material, the US fired more than 1,000 Tomahawks during the Iran war. The problem is that production had historically been relatively slow. Between fiscal years 2015 and 2026, US procurement averaged roughly 86 Tomahawks a year. That means even a major increase in annual orders cannot immediately replace thousands of missiles used during a prolonged conflict. The Pentagon has requested hundreds of additional Tomahawks as part of its effort to rebuild stocks, but delivery timelines remain long. CSIS has estimated that US Tomahawk inventories could take until late 2030 to return to pre-war levels under existing delivery schedules. Why can't defence companies simply make more missiles? This is one of the biggest challenges facing the Pentagon. Modern missiles are not mass-produced like conventional consumer goods. They require specialised components, advanced electronics, guidance systems, rocket motors, seekers, specialised metals and highly trained workers. Many components are manufactured by a limited number of suppliers. Increasing production therefore requires more than simply giving a defence company a larger order. Companies may need to establish new production lines, purchase machinery, expand factories, hire and train workers and secure additional suppliers. Congress must also approve funding before many of these programmes can move forward. This creates a gap between the Pentagon deciding that it needs more weapons and those weapons actually reaching military inventories. Some advanced missile systems can take several years from funding approval to delivery. That is why Feinberg's demand for companies to submit plans within 21 days is aimed not only at increasing production but also at shortening the time required to deliver weapons. What exactly does the Pentagon want from defence firms? Feinberg's memo asks companies to identify ways to accelerate production and delivery of critical capabilities. The Pentagon wants industry to examine where existing production schedules can be shortened and where manufacturing capacity can be expanded. The department is also looking at bottlenecks in the supply chain. The broader effort includes increasing production of components used in Patriot and THAAD interceptors, including rocket motors and other critical parts. The Pentagon has already entered into agreements with major defence companies to expand production capacity. According to the supplied material, agreements with Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman worth more than $3 billion are intended to expand production of components used in Patriot PAC-3 and THAAD systems. The Pentagon has said the broader initiative is designed to triple Patriot production capacity and quadruple THAAD production, while also adding another supplier for PAC-3 rocket motors. The aim is to ensure that a shortage of one component does not slow production of an entire missile system. How long could rebuilding US stocks take? The answer varies from one weapon system to another. - THAAD: CSIS estimates that replacing the interceptors used during the conflict could take until the end of 2029. - Patriot: Rebuilding more than 1,000 Patriot interceptors used during the conflict could take until around the middle of 2029, according to the CSIS assessment. - Tomahawk: Existing production schedules could leave US inventories below pre-war levels until late 2030. - SM-3 and SM-6: Production and delivery could take several years, with CSIS estimating lead times of roughly 36 to 39 months after funding approval. - JASSM: The recovery could be faster because the US had larger stocks and production was already relatively high before the war. - PrSM: Since the Precision Strike Missile is a newer system and the pre-war inventory was relatively small, rebuilding stocks could take considerably less time. The differences show why the Pentagon is focusing on production capacity rather than simply placing larger orders. Why are Patriot and THAAD particularly important? Patriot and THAAD perform different roles but form a critical part of the US and allied missile-defence network. Patriot interceptors are used to engage incoming missiles at lower altitudes and have become one of the most sought-after air-defence systems in the world. THAAD operates at a higher altitude and is designed primarily to intercept ballistic missiles during the terminal phase of their flight. Both systems became particularly important during Iranian missile attacks against US forces and regional allies. A reduction in their inventories could limit the number of interceptors available for future attacks. The problem is made more complicated by demand from allies. Ukraine relies heavily on Patriot systems to defend against Russian missile attacks, while countries in the Middle East also require the systems to protect against Iranian missile threats. The US therefore has to balance its own stockpile requirements with commitments to allies. Why is China part of the Pentagon's concern? The issue goes beyond the Iran conflict. US defence planners are also worried about the possibility of a future conflict with China, particularly over Taiwan. A prolonged conflict in the Middle East has demonstrated how quickly sophisticated weapons can be consumed during sustained combat. If US stocks remain depleted for years, Washington could face a difficult situation in which it has to manage military commitments in the Middle East, Europe and the Indo-Pacific simultaneously. CSIS has described the prolonged rebuilding timelines as creating a potential "window of vulnerability" for the US. The concern is particularly acute for weapons such as long-range precision missiles and advanced air-defence interceptors, which would also be required in a high-intensity conflict in the Western Pacific. Trump disputes reports of weapons shortages President Donald Trump has repeatedly rejected reports that the US is running dangerously low on ammunition. On Thursday, Trump said the US has "massive amounts" of weapons and added that "large amounts are being manufactured and shipped to the U.S. as needed." Trump has also criticised reports suggesting that he confronted Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth over depleted weapons stocks. Responding to a Washington Post report on Truth Social, Trump said he was "extremely happy" with Hegseth's performance and accused the newspaper of spreading "false and completely unfounded rumours". "The Fake News, as usual, is spreading false and completely unfounded rumours. I am extremely happy with the job that Pete Hegseth is doing," Trump wrote. The White House and Pentagon have denied claims that Trump confronted Hegseth over weapons shortages at a Camp David meeting. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the reported confrontation "literally never happened", while Parnell said Hegseth had not misled Trump about US ammunition supplies. Pentagon says stocks are sufficient for current war The Pentagon's position is that the US military currently has enough weapons to conduct its operations. Parnell has said the department has everything required for current military operations, while Conley separately said the US has sufficient munitions "for the task at hand". That does not necessarily contradict the concerns about depleted inventories. The distinction is between having enough weapons to fight today and having enough weapons to sustain prolonged combat or prepare for another major war. The Pentagon can maintain that it has sufficient munitions for current operations while simultaneously ordering industry to accelerate production because replacing what has already been fired could take years. What does this mean for America's defence industry? The Pentagon's demand could lead to a major expansion of the US defence industrial base. Companies will face pressure to increase production rates, build new facilities and strengthen supply chains. Lockheed Martin, RTX, Northrop Grumman and other major contractors are already investing in expanded production. But the industry faces its own constraints. Production capacity cannot be expanded instantly, particularly for highly specialised missile components. The Pentagon's latest directive therefore represents an attempt to push defence companies to move faster while the government provides the contracts and funding needed to support expansion. Parnell said the initiative would "inform the fiscal year 2028 budget submitted to Congress for funding" and was consistent with the Pentagon's effort to rebuild the defence industrial base. The funding battle in Congress The production push is also taking place against a broader fight over US defence spending. A defence spending bill is currently stalled in Congress as lawmakers debate President Trump's military action against Iran and the administration's request to substantially increase Pentagon spending. The White House has sought a defence budget of about $1.5 trillion, compared with roughly $900 billion the previous year. Any major expansion of missile production will require substantial government funding. But even if Congress approves the money, the physical expansion of production lines and supply chains will still take time.