Another diplomat agreed, saying, “[Air defense] is one of our biggest gaps.
We cannot deny it.”Photo credit: Janek Skarzynski/AFPNATO’s new defense plans stress the need to “significantly increase” air and missile defense systems.
“That’s your mission—your mission is missile defense,” said Senator Angus King, Chairman of the Senate Strategic Forces Subcommittee, talking to top Pentagon officials.
He asked why the Defense Department hasn’t developed a working air and missile defense system despite getting tens of billions of dollars every year.
“I will await further responses because our missile defense capabilities are quite limited at the moment,” King remarked.
The United States has decided to pause the delivery of Patriot interceptor missiles. US National Security Council spokesman John Kirby confirmed this decision. The main reason is the urgent need to send these missiles to Ukraine.
Photo credit: Lockheed Martin
How will this impact countries currently using Patriot systems? “This will affect allies who rely on the US for Patriot missiles,” commented ZeroHedge, quoting Kirby. These missiles, which are not being produced right now, will be sent to Ukraine. This decision also includes missiles for another system used by Kyiv, the NASAMS.
Kirby said missiles will start arriving in Ukraine in the next few weeks, definitely before summer ends. This matches up with the arrival of US-made F-16s that can carry AMRAAMs. According to Kirby, this decision won’t affect Taiwan.
Photo credit: Kongsberg
There are worries about the US’s missile stockpile, especially after they were heavily used in Ukraine and against Houthi drones around the Red Sea. Sending more missiles to Ukraine suggests the US might be limited in using more of its reserves.
For US allies waiting for interceptors, even a delay of 16 months is troubling. Plus, not delivering on promised weapons could hurt the US’s credibility for future promises. This is even more important if the conflict in Ukraine continues.
Basically, it shows us that while there are firm orders, the US can still adjust timelines, even if not directly in conflict. This flexibility might influence the future decisions of potential buyers. Some allies might accept this, but others may not. Each country has its own security challenges, and not all are deeply involved in supporting Ukraine.
Photo credit: German MoD
When talking about the challenges faced by US allies, it’s important to mention a report from May that sheds light on NATO’s eastern flank in Europe. According to the Financial Times, European NATO countries currently lack enough air defense systems needed to protect their eastern European members if the conflict in Ukraine escalates into a direct confrontation with Russia.
The report reveals a concerning reality: NATO has “less than 5 percent” of the necessary capacity to defend its eastern flank from a potential “full-scale attack” by Russia, as reported by Obektivno.bg, citing the FT.
“Air and missile defense are key to protecting Eastern Europe. Right now, we just don’t have enough,” a senior NATO diplomat told us. Another diplomat agreed, saying, “[Air defense] is one of our biggest gaps. We cannot deny it.”
Photo credit: Janek Skarzynski/AFP
NATO’s new defense plans stress the need to “significantly increase” air and missile defense systems. This is because sending equipment to Ukraine has led to “depleted” stocks in Europe.
In May, during a US Senate hearing, a surprising fact came out: the US military currently can’t defend against Russian hypersonic missiles. “That’s your mission—your mission is missile defense,” said Senator Angus King, Chairman of the Senate Strategic Forces Subcommittee, talking to top Pentagon officials. He asked why the Defense Department hasn’t developed a working air and missile defense system despite getting tens of billions of dollars every year.
“I will await further responses because our missile defense capabilities are quite limited at the moment,” King remarked. “Whether it’s hypersonic missiles or drones, we need to refocus our efforts on missile defense.” Recent comments about NATO’s weak air and missile defenses, especially in the east, make us wonder what European leaders expect moving forward.
Photo credit: Lockheed Martin
NATO’s lack of air defense is striking, especially since the alliance allocated $1.3 trillion in 2023—over 55% of global defense spending—which is more than 13 times Russia’s military spending for the same period.
Military officials and politicians from Belgium, Italy, and Germany have stated that they would only have enough ammunition for 24-48 hours of combat if faced with a large-scale attack.
Despite the White House’s solid support for Ukraine, there are still questions about its effectiveness, considering ongoing setbacks on the front lines and a growing manpower crisis. How does not providing missile interceptors help NATO’s eastern flank? And is the real reason hidden—that if Russia doesn’t attack NATO, we are ready to provoke it?
***
Follow us everywhere and at any time. BulgarianMilitary.com has responsive design and you can open the page from any computer, mobile devices or web browsers. For more up-to-date news, follow our Google News, YouTube, Reddit, LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook pages. Our standards: Manifesto & ethical principles
