US Missile Inventory Depleted by Israel Defense, Allies Concerned

A Pentagon report reveals that US missile stocks were significantly depleted while defending Israel from Iranian attacks, raising concerns about US readiness in Asia.
politicsNQ 50/100出典:PR Times

📋 Article Processing Timeline

  • 📰 Published: May 22, 2026 at 13:19
  • 🔍 Collected: May 22, 2026 at 13:31 (12 min after Published)
  • 🤖 AI Analyzed: May 31, 2026 at 21:25 (223h 53m after Collected)
Washington, May 21 (CNA) - According to a Department of Defense assessment obtained by The Washington Post, the US military consumed a significantly higher number of high-end munitions defending Israel during the conflict with Iran than Israel itself, leading to a sharp depletion of advanced missile defense interceptors. Three anonymous US officials stated that this imbalance highlights the heavy burden Washington shouldered during 'Operation Epic Fury' to counter Iranian ballistic missile attacks, while also raising questions about the US military's own readiness and its global security commitments. One US government official stated that the US launched approximately 120 more interceptor missiles than Israel, and the number of Iranian missiles intercepted was about double that of Israel's. US officials said that to defend Israel, the US launched over 200 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors, accounting for about half of the Pentagon's total inventory. Additionally, naval vessels stationed in the Eastern Mediterranean launched over 100 SM-3 and SM-6 interceptors. In contrast, Israel launched fewer than 100 'Arrow' interceptors and about 90 'David's Sling' interceptors, some of which were used against lower-tech missiles fired by Iranian-backed groups in Yemen and Lebanon. Kelly Grieco, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, noted, 'These numbers are staggering. The US shouldered most of the air defense burden, while Israel preserved its own munitions stockpile. Even if the operational logic is sound, the result is that the US now has only about 200 THAAD interceptors left, and production lines cannot keep up with demand.' The shortage of US interceptors has unsettled American allies in Asia, particularly Japan and South Korea, as they rely on the US to deter potential threats from China and North Korea. Grieco admitted, 'The cost of this may eventually surface in a theater unrelated to Iran.' Israel relies primarily on lower-tier air defense systems like 'Iron Dome' and 'David's Sling' to counter attacks from groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis, thereby preserving more advanced interceptors. Officials pointed out that this resulted in a 'significant' depletion of US stocks, while Israel maintained a higher-tier air defense reserve. A government official stated that if the US and Israel were to restart hostilities with Iran in the coming days, as President Trump has threatened, the US military might have to shoulder a larger proportion of interception tasks because Israel has recently taken some of its missile defense systems offline for maintenance. This official said, 'Once hostilities resume, the imbalance could worsen.' It is currently unclear whether the shortage of US munitions will affect Trump's considerations regarding restarting hostilities. Pentagon chief spokesperson Sean Parnell said, 'Ballistic missile interceptors are just one of the vast systems and capabilities that make up a multi-layered integrated air defense network. During 'Operation Epic Fury,' Israel and the US shared defense responsibilities fairly. Both countries deployed fighter jets, counter-drone systems, and various other advanced air and missile defense weapons during the operation, achieving maximum combat effectiveness.' The Israeli Embassy in the US stated, 'Operations Roaring Lion and Epic Fury were coordinated at the highest level and in the closest manner, benefiting both countries and their allies. No other partner of the US can compare to Israel in terms of military will, readiness, common interests, and capabilities.' Justin Logan, director of defense and foreign policy studies at the CATO Institute, stated that this interaction seems to conflict with Trump's 'America First' platform.

FAQ

Does this affect Japan?

Yes, it raises concerns about US readiness to deter threats in the Indo-Pacific.