For nearly the past two years there has been a great demand in the American civilian market for firearms ammunition. The pandemic spurred record sales in firearms, while at the same time supply chain bottlenecks have limited production. That created a perfect storm where the demand outpaced supply – and for months, empty shelves were a common sight at gun retailers across the country.
Now, there is a far more serious problem coming into focus.
The U.S. military, as well as those of its allies and strategic partners, may have enough small arms ammunition, but there is a shortfall of artillery and other heavy ordnance. Western defense stockpiles have been depleted as NATO members have supplied the Ukrainian military in recent months.
As the Financial Times recently reported, the conflict in Ukraine has exposed the “skimpiness” of western defense stockpiles – most notably the “unglamorous but crucial supplies such as artillery shells” that are now crucial to Kyiv’s efforts in the Donbas region of Eastern Ukraine.
“Supplies of key weapons are running low, as weapons are being sent to Ukraine at a rate which cannot be matched by manufacturers trying to replace them,” explained Madeline Wild, associate analyst at international analytics firm GlobalData.
“There will always be a problem with military planners in what is the acceptable level of stock to maintain,” Wild told ClearanceJobs. “Years of counter insurgency operations have meant that systems such as Javelin have not been prioritized, the old saying of ‘Armies prepare to fight their last war’ can provide some insight as to where the U.S. military is in its supplies. The U.S. does maintain, however, that it still has enough supplies of key components for its own troops in the event of another conflict, with particular focus on Taiwan, but the war in Ukraine has been somewhat of a wakeup call to military planners.”
Blame the Supply Chain Bottlenecks
The United States, like many nations, isn’t on a “wartime” economy – so the factories that produce artillery shells and other ordnance simply aren’t running around the clock. At the same time, the stockpiles are being depleted at a rate faster than some military analysts would have predicted had the U.S./NATO been engaged in a major conflict.
One factor is that no one actually expected the war in Ukraine to last as long as it has.
The Kremlin, which began its unprovoked and unwarranted invasion on February 24, reportedly anticipated a conflict that was to have lasted days at most. By some accounts, Russia expected to be welcomed as liberators, which explains why some tank crews crossed the border with dress uniforms instead of cold weather clothing and equipment. After months of fighting, there are reports that Russia is also running low on ammunition and ordnance.
Another part of the story is that the supply chain bottlenecks have made it impossible to increase the production lines in the United States – and the situation is even worse by some accounts in Russia. However, the fact remains that the U.S. was not even prepared to ramp up production.
The problem won’t be easily addressed.
“This is worsened by existing issues in the manufacturing process such as supply chain problems, labor shortages, a lack of parts, and slow production schedules,” Wild continued. “The scale and length of the conflict took NATO members, and crucially their defense industries, by surprise. It is the industrial response and the government support industrial efforts to replenish stocks that will define the longevity and success of military aid to Ukraine.”
Replenishment Efforts?
There have been comparisons of today’s ordnance shortfalls to the First World War’s “great shell crisis,” when the British military fired so many rounds that it completely depleted stockpiles. That shortage led to high troop casualties, but also the resignation of British Prime Minister H.H. Asquith for his handling of the war.
The current shortfall won’t likely end any political careers, and President Joe Biden even visited Lockheed Martin’s facilities in Alabama earlier this year to see how the defense contractor was planning to increase production of its FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missile systems. The company has pledged to increase production of the anti-tank system that has been used to great success by the Ukrainians in destroying Russian tanks.
Yet, the U.S. and its allies will face shortages lasting throughout this year and likely well into 2023.
“It will take multiple years for stocks to be replenished due to a web of industrial issues, none of which will be quick to resolve,” said Wild. “Supply chain problems, labor shortages, a lack of parts, and slow production schedules are some of the primary hurdles to stock replenishment. The Stinger, manufactured by Raytheon, exemplifies this well. It has not been in production since the early 2000s and so one of its key components is no longer manufactured. A replacement for this part must be created before production of Stingers can resume, but even then, it will take time for production to ramp up.”
Wild added that this isn’t entirely a “new problem,” and the U.S. military has acknowledged that the maximum production rate for the Javelin was 6,480 per year, but it would take over a year to reach that rate, with the delivery time being around 32 months.
“This could explain why the U.S. is pivoting towards more novel anti-armour systems such as the AeroVironment Switchblade Loitering Munitions, which can be produced quicker and using less advanced systems than the Javelin,” she explained.
A Lesson in History
Even as the Ukrainian people continue to suffer, some good could come from the war – namely that it has been a good lesson for NATO in how to be better prepared. Just as the conflict may have shown how tank warfare will need to evolve and how drones, such as the Switchblade, will find a place on the modern battlefield; the conflict has highlighted the importance of being able to maintain ordnance production.
“The conflict in Ukraine has opened NATO’s eyes to what must be done in the future to prevent dangerously low weapon reserves, should a similar event occur,” said Wild.
“The U.S. government has been particularly keen to ensure safe levels of munitions due to Chinese posturing over Taiwan. President Biden did sign the Lend-Lease Act earlier this year, which means that the US can transfer military goods to Ukraine by deferring required payment for the equipment and waives the Presidential sign-off requirement,” she noted. “But this is a reactionary approach that does not provide foundations for a better response in future conflicts. Instead, legislation that future proofs the industry is required, such as the establishment of critical munition reserves that was enshrined in the 2023 NDAA.”
It is certainly safe to say that most military planners did not anticipate Ukrainian efforts to counter the Russia invaders, but no one could have foreseen that so much military hardware would be sent to aid Kyiv’s efforts.
“In the U.S. this will likely see a change to what an acceptable level of munitions is,” suggested Wild. “The intensity of the conflict in Ukraine and speed with which it erupted as also meant that planners will need to develop mechanisms for much faster reaction to world conflicts.”
