Will Speaker Johnson help solve America’s munitions crunch?

The Pentagon announced this week that it was redirecting back to Israel 155-millimeter artillery shells drawn from the American war reserve stockpile in that country that had been meant to replenish American military stocks in Europe. The shortfall in Europe was due to the drawdown of American artillery to support Ukrainian forces. An American official, who would not be identified, claimed that the United States could continue to supply both Israel and Ukraine, and meet its own requirements at the same time. As that official put it, America “can walk and chew gum at the same time.”

The official’s assertion was brave enough, but that does not mean it is accurate. The Department of Defense has faced serous ammunition shortfalls due to its support of Ukraine’s efforts to roll back Russia’s invading forces. To that end, earlier this year it drew down 300,000 rounds from two Israeli stockpiles and shipped them to Ukraine. At the same time, the Pentagon sought to gear up an American defense industrial base that, prior to the Russian invasion, simply was not prepared for a massive uptick in ammunition production.

Over the past 18 months, the Biden administration has asked for, and received, congressional approval for funding an expansion of the munitions industrial base. But those requests did not anticipate additional strains from Israel’s urgent need for munitions, even as Ukraine’s requirements have in no way diminished. The redirection of stockpiles in Israel raises the question of the state of American stockpiles in Europe and is a clear indication that the ammunition shortfall remains a severe challenge for the military.

Funding ammunition production is a major element of the administration’s current $106 billion supplemental request to the Congress. The bulk of funding for replenishing American ammunition shortfalls due to its support of both Israel and Ukraine actually falls within the $30 billion package meant for Ukraine; funding for Israel is meant primarily to support its missile and air defense needs. It is unclear whether the American industrial base, already under strain to satisfy prior requirements for accelerated ammunition production, will be able to meet the demands resulting from America’s funding to support two wars simultaneously

It is equally uncertain whether any of the funds for Ukraine will pass the Congress. Last month, Congress did not approve the administration’s supplemental request for $24 billion to fund support for Ukraine through December. The current request funds assistance to Ukraine through the end of Fiscal Year 2024. Whether the House in particular, now under a new and far more conservative Speaker, will be prepared to approve the administration’s latest request is an open question.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has made it clear that he backs supplemental funding to support Israel’s weapons and munitions requirements. Legislation to that effect is likely to pass both houses of Congress. But Johnson has consistently opposed assistance to Ukraine since May 2022, when the administration requested $40 billion in military and other assistance for Kyiv. Should Johnson continue to oppose aid to Ukraine, and should a Ukraine package therefore fail to pass the House, the Pentagon will have to cope with an exceedingly serious munitions shortfall should it wish to continue to support Ukraine’s operations on the battlefield.

Administration officials are pressing America’s European allies to step up their munitions and weapons production to support the Ukrainian effort. Whether and how quickly the allies will respond will likely depend on what transpires in Washington. Should a Ukraine supplemental fail to win congressional approval, American requests of other nations will ring hollow, and it is highly doubtful whether the allies will fill the munitions gap that congressional inaction will have created.

There is still significant support for Ukraine among a majority of Republicans (as well as Democrats) in the House, notably from Rep. Michael McCaul, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee. Moreover, despite his previous opposition to aid for Ukraine, Speaker Johnson, who announced upon taking office that the “people’s house is back in business,” may yet decide to support a truncated assistance package for Kyiv, perhaps reverting to an amount that approximates, but may not reach, the administration’s September request. In that case, however, the Biden team will find itself requesting yet another supplemental in two months’ time.

In the meantime, if Israel’s war with Hamas drags on, U.S. stocks in the Middle East will continue to dwindle, resulting in the need for another Israel supplemental as well. The conundrum that Washington now faces could therefore quickly repeat itself relatively soon with even greater uncertainty as to how the Republican majority in the House will respond to yet another Israel/Ukraine supplemental request.

The chaos in the House since Rep. Kevin McCarthy was dethroned from the speakership has left both Washington and its allies reeling with bewilderment. At least there is now a Speaker in place who has promised to lead the entire House, not just those on his side of the aisle.

Hopefully Speaker Johnson will quickly demonstrate his bona fides in that regard by supporting passage of both an Israel and Ukraine supplemental, whether in tandem or separately, and thereby reassure allies, partners and friends that America can still be relied upon to act in a manner befitting the leader of the Free World.

Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.