Concerns are mounting over the depletion of the United States’ missile inventory, a situation that has reportedly led to tensions within the administration and may have influenced recent strategic decisions regarding Iran. Reports suggest that President Donald Trump clashed with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over the scarcity of key long-range precision weapons, and this issue may have contributed to the president’s decision to cancel a large-scale strike campaign against Iran, though the White House denies this connection.

At the heart of the issue are two cornerstone missile systems: the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile and the Joint Air to Surface Stand-off Munition (JASSM). Tomahawks, launched from US naval vessels, can strike targets up to 1,500 miles inland and had an estimated inventory of just over 3,000 units prior to recent conflicts with Iran. Approximately 1,000 have been used since the current hostilities began. JASSMs, launched from aircraft at distances exceeding 500 miles, were similarly stocked at about 4,000 units, with over 1,000 expended during the same period.

These missile systems hold strategic significance because they allow the US to conduct precision strikes deep within enemy territory without exposing pilots or ships to hostile air defenses. Their presence has been a critical factor in deterrence strategies globally. For example, US capacity to target and potentially neutralize Russian air defenses in regions like Ukraine and the Baltics poses a significant operational threat, shaping Moscow’s calculus on the use of nuclear weapons and military engagement.

The Biden administration previously warned that any use of nuclear weapons by Russia would result in “catastrophic consequences,” a stance made credible by the US’s ability to respond with high-precision conventional strikes that do not risk American personnel. This capability underpins the security assurances extended to NATO allies and influences strategic considerations across the Indo-Pacific, where countries such as Japan and Australia rely on US military reach.

While alternative precision munitions like smart bombs exist in larger quantities, they require manned aircraft to operate within hostile airspace—often heavily defended. The standard approach involves using Tomahawks and JASSMs to degrade enemy air defenses first, thereby enabling safer deployment of more abundant and cost-effective ordnance. However, enemy air defenses cannot be completely neutralized, as demonstrated in April when a US F-15E Strike Eagle was shot down over Iran. The ensuing rescue operation was extensive and complex, involving 155 aircraft and resulting in further losses, including the destruction of transport planes that had to be abandoned on the ground. The incident reportedly provoked significant frustration from President Trump and highlighted the risks of manned operations over Iran.

Given these operational hazards, US military planners and political leaders appear reluctant to authorize manned flights deep into Iranian airspace, leaving the limited stockpiles of Tomahawks and JASSMs as the key tools for any large-scale strikes. Production of these missiles is being increased and lower-cost alternatives are in development, but current replenishment rates—measured in a few hundred units annually—cannot keep pace with present consumption levels.

This ongoing shortfall has implications beyond the Iran conflict, affecting US strategic posture globally. Allies and adversaries alike are closely monitoring the status of American missile stocks, recognizing their role in maintaining deterrence and operational flexibility. With inventories shrinking and replacements pending, the world is witnessing the strain on a critical component of US military capability that underpins much of the current international security architecture.