Can the US sustain its war in Iran?

Can the US sustain its war in Iran?

President Trump declared that the United States possesses an “effectively boundless” arsenal of weaponry. His defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, echoed this by stating Iran cannot match the U.S. in endurance. Yet, concerns linger over the depletion of high-grade defensive missiles, casting doubt on Washington’s long-term readiness. On February 28, the U.S. initiated “Operation Epic Fury” in Iran, marking the beginning of a sustained aerial, land, and sea campaign. Within days, thousands of strikes were executed, targeting numerous sites across the country.

Initial Strikes and Strategic Claims

Early attacks saw the killing of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, in a joint U.S.-Israel operation. Despite this, Trump projected a four-to-five-week conflict as the maximum, hinting at a broader, prolonged engagement. “Our stockpiles of defensive and offensive weapons allow us to sustain this campaign as long as we need,” Hegseth emphasized during a visit to Central Command. General Dan Caine, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, similarly affirmed, “We have sufficient precision munitions for the task at hand, both on the offense and defense.”

Cost Efficiency and Resource Limits

While Trump praised the nation’s munitions readiness, he privately noted constraints in the most advanced weaponry. In a post on Truth Social, he wrote, “The United States Munitions Stockpiles have, at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better … At the highest end, we have a good supply but are not where we want to be.” Kelly Grieco, a Stimson Center expert, highlighted that the critical issue lies in the top-tier missiles and interceptors. “There are real limitations on stockpiles there,” she said, stressing that these high-grade systems are essential for countering Iran’s threats.

Financial Pressures on Defense

The conflict has placed significant strain on defense budgets. Shahed 136 drones, produced at a cost of $20,000 to $50,000 each, have been deployed in large numbers by Iran. U.S. fighter jets armed with AIM-9 missiles, priced at $450,000 per unit, require an additional $40,000 hourly for operation. “The cost of operating the fighter for an hour is equivalent to the cost of a Shahed,” Grieco noted, adding that the cost exchange is inefficient. She pointed to Ukraine’s success with cheaper interceptor drones as a model the U.S. could emulate.

Stockpile Depletion and Production Gaps

Patriot defense missiles, costing around $3 million each, are reserved for intercepting Iran’s ballistic missiles. Mark Cancian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies warned that these stocks are dwindling. “At the beginning, I think there were about 1,000 Patriots, and we’ve chewed into that inventory quite a bit now,” he estimated, noting that 200-300 have already been fired. High-grade weapons like the Patriot take time to manufacture, with Lockheed Martin delivering just 620 PAC-3 interceptors in 2025. “If you asked the company today for one more Patriot, it would take at least two years to deliver,” Cancian explained.

Short-Range Weapons and Long-Term Viability

For shorter-range munitions such as bombs, JDAM kits, and Hellfire missiles, the situation appears more favorable. Cancian argued that the U.S. has ample ground-based supplies to maintain operations. “Militarily, I think we could sustain it for a very long time,” he said, citing the availability of such weapons. However, the challenge remains in scaling up production of high-end systems. On March 6, Trump met with defense firms, announcing plans to quadruple output of top-tier weaponry. While the White House framed the meeting as long-planned, Grieco questioned its impact. “I found that to be like a non-announcement, as most of these deals had already been disclosed.”

To view this video, enable JavaScript and upgrade to a web browser supporting HTML5 video. The evolving dynamics of the conflict underscore a critical balance between strategic momentum and resource sustainability. As the battle intensifies, the U.S. must navigate both immediate needs and long-term logistical hurdles to maintain its position in the region.