The United States’ ability to defend Taiwan in the event of a near-term conflict with China is being quietly reassessed inside the administration, as extensive weapons use in the ongoing Iran war strains critical stockpiles. According to reporting by The Wall Street Journal, some U.S. officials now worry that current munitions levels could complicate long-standing contingency plans in the Indo-Pacific.
Since the conflict with Iran began on February 28, U.S. forces have expended vast quantities of advanced weaponry, including more than 1,000 long-range Tomahawk missiles and up to 2,000 air-defense interceptors such as Thaad and Patriot systems. Officials familiar with the matter say replenishing these stockpiles could take as long as six years, raising concerns about short-term readiness for other major conflicts.
The implications are particularly significant for a potential crisis involving Taiwan, which China considers part of its territory. While there are currently no indications that Beijing is preparing imminent military action, U.S. defense planners have long treated a Taiwan scenario as one of the most demanding contingencies. The depletion of munitions has prompted internal discussions about whether operational plans would need to be adjusted if such a conflict were to arise soon.
Despite these concerns, senior officials have publicly pushed back against the notion that U.S. military readiness has been compromised. Admiral Samuel Paparo, who leads U.S. forces in the Pacific, told lawmakers that ongoing operations in the Middle East are providing valuable combat experience and have not yet imposed meaningful costs on America’s ability to deter China. Similarly, the White House and Pentagon have insisted that the United States retains a deep and capable arsenal.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed the concerns outright, stating that the U.S. military remains fully equipped to carry out any mission ordered by the president. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell echoed that message, emphasizing the breadth of available capabilities across global commands.
Yet outside government, analysts are increasingly uneasy. A recent study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that the Iran conflict may have consumed more than a quarter of U.S. Tomahawk missile reserves and a majority of some critical air-defense interceptors. These defensive systems are particularly vital in a Taiwan scenario, where U.S. forces would need to counter a barrage of Chinese missiles designed to restrict access to the region.
“It’s going to be years before we can rebuild those inventories,” said Mark Cancian, one of the report’s authors, underscoring the long-term strain on the defense-industrial base.
The strategic challenge is compounded by the scale and sophistication of China’s military. Under the leadership of Xi Jinping, Beijing has rapidly expanded its arsenal, including nuclear weapons, advanced missiles, and a growing fleet of drones. U.S. defense assessments indicate that China aims to achieve full control over Taiwan by 2049, even if it has no fixed timeline for military action.
Any conflict over Taiwan would likely be far more intense than the current fighting in the Middle East. War games conducted by U.S. think tanks have repeatedly shown that such a scenario could result in massive casualties, the loss of naval fleets, and the destruction of hundreds of aircraft on both sides. Analysts warn that maintaining a large and ready stockpile of munitions is essential to withstand the early stages of such a الحرب, particularly against China’s “anti-access, area denial” strategy.
“The U.S. would have to fight China in a way that is potentially much more costly and dangerous,” said Kelly Grieco, noting that higher losses would be likely without sufficient defensive systems.
The strain on resources is not limited to munitions. The U.S. has also redeployed key air-defense assets from the Pacific to support operations in the Middle East, including radar systems and interceptors. According to Xavier Brunson, some systems remain in place in regions like South Korea, but the shifting allocation of resources highlights the global trade-offs facing military planners.
Inside Washington, the situation has reignited debates about strategic priorities. Officials in the administration of Donald Trump have long argued that the United States must conserve its most advanced weapons for a potential great-power conflict with China, rather than expending them in smaller regional engagements. The Iran war, however, has demonstrated how quickly stockpiles can be depleted even in a limited but high-intensity campaign.
In response, the Pentagon is accelerating efforts to rebuild its arsenal. Major defense contractors such as RTX Corporation and Lockheed Martin have announced plans to ramp up production of key systems, including missile interceptors and long-range strike weapons. The administration is also seeking $350 billion in funding for munitions procurement in the fiscal 2027 budget, part of a broader push to strengthen the defense-industrial base.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has framed the effort as a fundamental transformation of how the Pentagon acquires weapons, calling for a shift to a “wartime footing” in manufacturing and procurement. The Pentagon has even reached out to civilian industries, including automakers, to explore ways to boost production capacity.
For now, officials insist that the United States remains capable of meeting its global commitments. But the concerns highlighted in The Wall Street Journal report point to a deeper issue: the growing tension between current military operations and future strategic needs. As the U.S. navigates multiple global flashpoints, the question is no longer just whether it can fight today’s wars—but whether it is prepared for the ones that may come next.
