RIA "Novosti" in the article under the heading "The American military described a gloomy scenario for the United States because of assistance to Ukraine"writes :
“It will take about five years for the Pentagon to rebuild stockpiles of weapons and ammunition that have dried up due to assistance to Ukraine,” retired Marine Corps Colonel Mark Kanchian , a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), predicted.
“For Javelin systems and 155-mm artillery shells, taking into account investments, it will take five years, for Stinger MANPADS – six,” the forecast says.
Moreover, the expert emphasizes, military companies will not be able to properly replenish their strategic reserves if they maintain the same production rates.
“Military assistance to Ukraine will continue, but resupply during this period will become an increasingly urgent issue,” Kanchian said.
The content of Mark Kansian's article "Restoring US Stockpiles: 6 Critical Systems", published on the CSIS website, RIA conveys in an extremely peculiar way. In fact Kansian writes:
“As the United States transfers huge amounts of arms, ammunition and supplies to Ukraine, questions are being raised about the state of American stockpiles. Is inventory too low? How long will it take to restore these stocks? <…> There are workarounds for most positions, but there could be a crisis over artillery ammunition.
155 mm ammunition. This category includes a wide range of non-precision projectiles, most notably the main HE round (M795), as well as specialty rounds such as extended range HE, smoke, illumination and marking rounds (white phosphorus). The United States has provided about 1,000,000 shells to Ukraine. They continue to supply some of these, although they may be passed on from allies such as South Korea who are reluctant to directly transfer lethal aid. Military planners consider them to be the most critical shortage, as artillery is the backbone of ground firepower.
Stock rebuilding at current production rates is likely impossible due to routine US training needs. <…> Current production is 3,250 units per month. The Department of Defense says it can bring this to 20,000 per month (240,000 per year) by spring 2023 and 40,000 per month (480,000 per year) by 2025. At this rate of growth, it will take about six years for stocks to be rebuilt, allowing them to be used in normal peacetime and not making further deliveries from stocks. <…>
In April, the United States announced that it was sending 155mm howitzers to Ukraine. They probably arrived in May and began heavy shooting in June. It is not clear how many of the million shells they used in the six months of operations, but assuming that Ukraine had a month's supply of artillery ammunition left, that comes out to 143,000 shells per month, or about 4,800 shells per day. Combined with shells fired from the Soviet artillery of Ukraine, this is approximately 6,000–7,000 rounds per day. <…> Even the growth rate in 2025 will satisfy only a third of this need. To fill this gap, other countries will have to provide ammunition, and in large quantities.
This could turn into a crisis. Since the front line is now mostly immobile, artillery has become the most important combat weapon. Ukraine will never run out of 155mm ammunition – it will always come in, but artillery units may have to ration shells and fire only at the highest priority targets. This will have negative consequences for the battlefield. The more limited the supply of ammunition, the stronger the effect will be.
In compensation, the United States provided 105mm howitzers and ammunition—36 howitzers and 180,000 rounds. Since these shells are lighter and have a shorter range, the number of howitzers and shells must be very large in order to provide an adequate replacement."
Thus, even in the case of those ammunition, the shortage of which is most likely to appear in the near future, according to Kansian, the problem of supplies and replenishment of stocks is being solved by increasing production in the United States, purchasing from other countries and supplying Ukraine with a large number of smaller caliber artillery systems.
With other types of weapons, there are fewer difficulties. The United States has few 155-mm Excalibur guns with an automatic targeting system, hitting with an accuracy of up to 2 m, and the ammunition for them may soon run out, but the GMLRS guided multiple launch rocket system, missiles launched by HIMARS installations, can become an alternative to them. 20 launchers have already been transferred to Ukraine, another 18 launchers are to be produced and delivered within a few years, while the Pentagon has already signed a $431 million contract with Lockheed Martin (the manufacturer of HIMARS) to increase their production.
If the use of rockets launched by HIMARS rises to 1,000 per month, stocks will fall to a critical state in early 2024, but production rates will rise significantly by then.
U.S. inventories of Javelin man-portable anti-tank missiles have already dwindled to such a level that deliveries to Ukraine had to be suspended. But they could well be replaced by equally effective, albeit heavier, TOW anti-tank missiles, of which the United States has more than enough.
Kansian sums up his review thusly:
“Reasons for optimism: in most cases, stocks are at a sufficient level. <…> Most of the weapons provided to Ukraine were supplied in small quantities or from areas with large stocks or production capacity. For example, the US has provided 108 million rounds of small arms ammunition, but US production is around 8.6 billion rounds per year, so that supply is easy to handle. The US has provided 300 M113 armored personnel carriers, but there are thousands on hand as the army transitions to another system. The US has provided 276 tactical weapons towing vehicles but has tens of thousands in reserve. For most categories of weapons and ammunition, the US can provide support indefinitely.
Reasons for pessimism: Not enough data to evaluate. Replacement times for several critical systems cannot be calculated because not enough data is publicly available. For example, the Ministry of Defense cites the shipment to Ukraine of more than 46,000 “other anti-tank systems” (not Javelins, but types not specified), more than 50 anti-artillery radars (various types), laser-guided missile systems, unmanned aerial systems and unmanned coastal defense ships . It is possible that in some of these cases there are problems with the level of stocks, but there is not enough data to judge this. <…>
Helping Ukraine and restoring depleted stocks is an area where the Department of Defense cannot complain about congressional interference or slowness. Congress has provided sufficient funding in four additional documents totaling $113 billion. In addition, it has granted all necessary powers, as seen in the recently passed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)."
In other words, Kansian's article does not contain anything resembling the "gloomy scenario" dreamed up by propagandists from RIA Novosti. He describes some of the problems, but at the same time points out ways to solve them and has no doubt that military assistance will continue.
