Quincy think tank: The Pentagon’s ability to take military action against Iran is an empty threat

According to Isna’s report, in an article, the American Andikshad has investigated the strategic, military, and political consequences of America’s military support to Europe; Especially focusing on the ongoing war in Ukraine and the escalation of tensions around Iran.

In this report, the think tank “Quincy Institute for Responsible Governance” points out that in recent weeks, one of the main axes in the political atmosphere of Washington has been the threat of “Donald Trump” of the US President to start the second round of airstrikes against Iran, a threat that Trump has not yet fulfilled.

Quincy emphasizes that there are several explanations for this unexpected delay. Among these explanations, the most worrisome factor for American supporters is the Pentagon’s shortage of military munitions, especially air defense interceptors. The American think tank, citing interviews with current and former US military officials, says that the country’s missile defense reserves are in a severely depleted and reduced state. The author notes that this situation continues even though eight months have passed since the end of the last extensive American military campaign; The campaign that included the defense of the Zionist regime in the 12-day war.

According to this report, although the slow production process and the deep accumulation of weapons shortages will make it take time to fully restore the US stocks to the level before 2022, an eight-month period should have been enough to restore at least a part of the defensive interceptor stocks to a less critical level. The continuation of the severity of these shortages shows that there is another factor at work, and according to this American think tank, the aforementioned factor is Ukraine.

What does America help Ukraine in practice?

Although Trump and his advisers say the United States will no longer pay for military aid to the war in Ukraine, that claim represents only part of the truth, according to Quincy. The article explains that the United States continues to send billions of dollars in weapons to Ukraine, and in many cases, these weapons come from new products that were supposed to be used to rebuild the US military’s stockpiles. This situation has far-reaching implications for US military readiness, the Pentagon’s ability to respond to real threats against its interests, and diplomatic efforts to end the war in Ukraine.

To clarify the dimensions of America’s continued commitment to Ukraine, Quincy points to two main routes through which US weapons end up in Ukraine instead of entering domestic stockpiles. The first path is the security assistance initiative to Ukraine. The Trump administration tried to remove the initiative from the latest budget, but Congress kept it, but the $400 million earmarked for 2026 is only a small portion of the aid already underway. About 19 billion dollars of outstanding contracts signed by the previous government have not yet been delivered to Ukraine. These weapons are scheduled to be transferred to Kyiv and Ukraine’s front lines in 2026 and 2027, and include air defense interceptors, multiple rocket launchers and 155 mm cannon shells.

The American media emphasizes that although these financial resources were allocated before Trump took office and are not considered a new expense, the implementation of these orders relies on the same industrial capacity that is needed to rebuild the reserves of the American army. As a result, Ukraine’s defense needs directly compete with the needs of the US military over the country’s limited defense industry capacity.

The second avenue Quincy is exploring is the “Priorized Requirements List of Ukraine” initiative, known as “PEARL”. The American think tank explains that this program is introduced as a mechanism to transfer the financial burden of arming Ukraine from America to Europe, in the sense that European countries buy American weapons and then transfer them to Ukraine. NATO member countries have pledged more than four billion dollars for this program and its volume is expected to reach 15 billion dollars in 2026. Quincy adds that the Perl program is widely used for air defense systems and a variety of munitions, and reports indicate that a significant portion of the Patriot missiles and air defense power used in Ukraine comes from this route.

Limited capacity and the Pentagon at the end of the line

According to Quincy, this has caused European countries’ purchase orders to be prioritized over the Pentagon’s purchase orders, and the needs of the US Department of War have actually been met with a delay. In some cases, weapons are taken directly from US stockpiles, which slows down the process of rebuilding the stockpiles and exacerbates shortages.

On the other hand, America’s production capacity is also limited and only about 60 Patriot missiles are produced per month. This limited amount must meet both Ukraine’s declared needs and global demand, which increases pressure on supply.

Another important issue in this report is the burden imposed on American taxpayers. Quincy explains that awareness of the continuing impact of aid to Ukraine on military readiness has led the Pentagon to call for significant investments in the defense industrial base. The requests include the 2026 budget as well as a confidential spending plan presented to Congress by Pete Hegst. In this way, American taxpayers indirectly pay for the purchase of European weapons for Ukraine through costly defense industry development.

end of message