Israel is not capable of waging and winning wars alone
In the shadow of Operation Epic Fury, the United States has quietly exhausted more than half its most sophisticated air-defense arsenal shielding Israel from Iranian ballistic missiles — a sacrifice that now echoes far beyond the Middle East. The asymmetry of burden, with America firing more than twice the interceptors Israel deployed, reveals the hidden cost of alliance: that defending one partner can quietly hollow out the promises made to others. As allies in Asia watch their own security guarantees thin against the backdrop of North Korean and Chinese threats, the world is reminded that military deterrence is not an infinite resource, and that the geometry of global commitments can shift without a single new declaration of war.
- The US has burned through over half its THAAD interceptor stockpile — more than 200 missiles — in a single conflict, leaving a production line that cannot replenish fast enough to restore readiness.
- Japan and South Korea are watching with alarm, knowing that the same interceptors now missing from US arsenals are the ones standing between them and the missile programs of North Korea and China.
- Iran, despite US and Israeli strikes, still holds roughly 70 percent of its pre-war missile reserves, meaning the threat that consumed those interceptors has not been proportionally reduced.
- Netanyahu is pressing to resume hostilities even as Israeli air-defense batteries go offline for maintenance, which would force the US to absorb an even greater share of the defensive burden in any new round of fighting.
- Trump has signaled he canceled an imminent strike at Arab allies' urging, dangling the possibility of a deal — but also warning of 'drastic measures,' leaving the trajectory of the conflict suspended between diplomacy and escalation.
The American military has burned through more than half its stockpile of advanced THAAD interceptors defending Israel during its conflict with Iran — a depletion that is now forcing hard questions about whether the United States can honor its security commitments elsewhere in the world.
The numbers tell a stark story. The US launched over 200 THAAD interceptors and more than 100 naval missiles from ships in the eastern Mediterranean. Israel, by contrast, deployed fewer than 100 Arrow interceptors and roughly 90 David's Sling missiles during the same period. The arrangement had a logic to it: the US absorbed Iran's most advanced ballistic threats while Israel conserved its high-end arsenal, relying on lower-tier systems against projectiles from Houthi and Hezbollah forces. But the result is that the US now holds approximately 200 THAAD interceptors in reserve, with a production line unable to keep pace with demand.
The shortage has alarmed allies in Asia. Japan and South Korea depend on US deterrence against North Korea and China, and analysts like Kelly Grieco of the Stimson Center have warned that the bill for Middle East operations risks arriving in scenarios that have nothing to do with Iran. The Pentagon has defended the arrangement as part of a broader layered defense that included aircraft and drone systems, and the Israeli embassy has emphasized close coordination between the two countries — but the underlying tension is real.
The conflict, which began on February 28th, has proven more costly and durable than either side anticipated. Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz, squeezing global energy supplies, and US intelligence assesses that Tehran retains roughly 70 percent of its pre-war missile reserves — far more than Trump's public claims suggest. Netanyahu has been pressing to resume hostilities, a push that has irritated US officials acutely aware of what renewed combat would cost in munitions. Complicating matters further, Israeli forces have recently taken some air-defense batteries offline for maintenance, meaning the US would shoulder an even larger share of the load if fighting resumes.
Trump said this week he had called off an imminent strike at the request of Arab allies seeking a negotiated settlement, one that would limit Iran's nuclear program in exchange for reopening the strait. 'Either we'll reach a deal, or we'll take somewhat drastic measures,' he told reporters. The US has positioned additional naval assets near Israel in preparation for either outcome. What comes next depends partly on whether Iran's regional partners choose to re-engage — and on whether Israeli commanders, whose sortie rates had already fallen by half by late March, can sustain the operational tempo a prolonged conflict demands.
The American military has burned through more than half its stockpile of advanced air-defense missiles protecting Israel during the recent conflict with Iran—a depletion that raises hard questions about whether the United States can meet its security commitments elsewhere in the world.
According to Pentagon assessments reviewed by The Washington Post, the disparity in firepower is stark. The U.S. military launched more than 200 THAAD interceptors, which represent roughly half the Pentagon's total inventory of these sophisticated weapons, along with over 100 naval-launched missiles fired from ships in the eastern Mediterranean. By contrast, Israeli forces deployed fewer than 100 Arrow interceptors and approximately 90 David's Sling missiles during the same period of hostilities known as Operation Epic Fury. The imbalance reflects a deliberate division of labor: the U.S. absorbed the burden of countering Iran's most advanced ballistic threats, while Israel conserved its high-end arsenal and relied instead on lower-tier systems like the Iron Dome and David's Sling to handle less sophisticated projectiles from Iranian-backed groups in Yemen and Lebanon.
Kelly Grieco, a senior researcher at the Stimson Center, called the numbers striking. "The United States took on the bulk of the air-defense mission while Israel preserved its own stockpiles," she said. Even with sound operational logic behind the arrangement, the U.S. is left with roughly 200 THAAD interceptors remaining and a production line unable to keep pace with demand. One American official summarized the imbalance plainly: the U.S. launched approximately 120 more interceptors than Israel and intercepted twice as many Iranian missiles.
The shortage has alarmed American allies in Asia, particularly Japan and South Korea, who depend on U.S. military deterrence against potential threats from North Korea and China. "That bill risks arriving at scenarios that have nothing to do with Iran," Grieco warned. The Pentagon and Israeli government have both defended the arrangement as a fair distribution of defensive burden, with Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell noting that interceptors represent only one tool within a broader layered defense network that included fighter aircraft, drone defenses, and other advanced capabilities. The Israeli embassy in Washington similarly emphasized the close coordination between the two countries and the shared interests at stake.
Yet the underlying tension is real. The conflict, which began on February 28th, has proven more difficult than either American or Israeli leaders anticipated. Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz, strangling global energy supplies and driving up inflation. Despite Trump's claims that Iran's missile arsenal has been nearly decimated, U.S. intelligence assesses that Tehran retains roughly 70 percent of its pre-war missile reserves. Much of Iran's highly enriched uranium likely remains in nuclear facilities that the U.S. and Israel bombed last year.
Tensions between the allies have mounted as the war has dragged on. Netanyahu and Trump had a tense phone call on Tuesday about the path forward, according to American and Middle Eastern officials. The Israeli prime minister has been pressing hard to resume hostilities, a push that has irritated some U.S. officials given the strain that renewed combat would place on the Pentagon's munitions supply. If fighting resumes, the problem will almost certainly worsen: Israeli forces have recently disconnected some air-defense batteries for maintenance, meaning the U.S. would shoulder an even larger share of the defensive load.
Earlier this week, Trump said he had canceled an imminent military strike against Iran at the request of Arab allies, who urged him to pursue a peace deal that would limit Iran's nuclear program in exchange for reopening the strait and ending the war. "We're in the final phase of the conflict with Iran. We'll see what happens," Trump told reporters Wednesday. "Either we'll reach a deal, or we'll take somewhat drastic measures." The U.S. has deployed additional naval assets near Israel in preparation for a possible resumption of hostilities. What happens next depends partly on the degree to which Iran's regional allies choose to engage. During the last round of fighting, Israeli aircraft were able to conduct only 50 percent of the sorties by late March compared to the start of the war, worn down by operations against the Houthis in Yemen and airstrikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon. The question, as one analyst put it, is whether Israeli commanders underestimated their capacity to sustain the operational tempo required for a prolonged conflict.
Notable Quotes
The figures are striking. The United States took on the bulk of the air-defense mission while Israel preserved its own stockpiles.— Kelly Grieco, Stimson Center
That bill risks arriving at scenarios that have nothing to do with Iran.— Kelly Grieco, on implications for Asian allies
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did the U.S. agree to fire so many more interceptors than Israel in the first place?
According to officials, they had a pre-arranged framework. The idea was that America's most advanced systems—THAAD, naval missiles—would handle Iran's ballistic threats, while Israel used its lower-tier defenses against less sophisticated projectiles from proxy groups. It made operational sense on paper: preserve Israel's high-end arsenal for future threats.
But that left the U.S. depleted.
Exactly. The Pentagon now has roughly 200 THAAD interceptors left, and production can't keep up. That's the real problem—not just what was spent, but what's left.
And this matters beyond Israel?
Enormously. Japan and South Korea depend on the U.S. as a deterrent against North Korea and China. If America's air-defense stocks are depleted, those allies are suddenly more vulnerable. The bill for defending Israel is arriving at places that have nothing to do with Iran.
Could Trump's "America First" rhetoric have prevented this?
That's what some analysts are asking. Trump promised to put American interests first, yet the U.S. absorbed the lion's share of the defensive burden while Israel conserved its own capabilities. It's a contradiction nobody's quite explained.
What happens if the fighting resumes?
The imbalance gets worse. Israel has disconnected some air-defense batteries for maintenance, so the U.S. would have to cover even more. And there's another layer: Israeli pilots are exhausted from operations in Gaza and Lebanon. They can't sustain the same sortie rate they did at the start of the war.