The U.S. strike campaign against Iran is creating a dangerous strategic dilemma: every precision munition and interceptor expended against Tehran is one fewer available for potential conflicts with Russia in Europe or China in East Asia. Defense analysts Amos C. Fox and Franz-Stefan Gady warn that Washington may soon face painful trade-offs between ongoing operations and preparedness for other contingencies.
As "Hvylya" reports, citing Foreign Policy, the scenario is already materializing. If the United States and Israel cannot destroy the majority of Iran's missile launchers and inventories in the opening days, and Iran succeeds in draining allied interceptor stockpiles, Washington "would then have to make painful trade-offs by taking munitions from stockpiles reserved for other major contingencies."
The problem has been documented in war games. Simulations of high-intensity warfare against Russia or China have consistently shown that U.S. precision munition inventories — both offensive weapons and defensive interceptors — become exhausted in days or weeks. The Iran campaign is now drawing down from those same limited pools.
Fox and Gady note that 21st-century precision-guided munitions cannot be rapidly replenished once depleted. Production is too slow and too expensive to resupply during an active campaign. This makes every missile expended against Iran a strategic calculation that extends far beyond the Middle East.
The analysts frame this as a structural vulnerability in how the United States approaches modern warfare. The American military concept of multidomain operations promises rapid, decisive victory through coordinated precision strikes. But when the campaign fails to deliver a quick result — as Fox and Gady argue is likely against Iran — the attritional reality exposes the limits of a force designed for short, sharp conflicts rather than sustained operations across multiple theaters.
Also read: The US Is Rapidly Bleeding Leverage: RUSI Points to Washington's Strategic Blunder