Is Israel Already Running Low On Missile Interceptors?

Latest stories Iran war's next escalation could pit US versus Turkey Polymarket death threat raises stakes of Iran war reporting Bangladesh reform drive hits early constitutional roadblock Why might Israel be running low

The 12-day war that Israel fought with Iran last year significantly depleted both its stockpile of anti-ballistic missiles, as well as that of its ally, the United States.

One Washington-based research centre calculated that Israel and the US intercepted 273 of 322 Iranian missiles they attempted to stop in the war, an 85% success rate.

Given a large number of these interceptors were used so recently, Israel and the US are unlikely to have fully replenished their stockpiles before launching the current war.

Another sign this is the case: the US is reportedly moving parts of its THAAD missile defense system from South Korea to the Middle East. This means the US will need to carry more of the defensive burden in the region, which could quickly deplete its own assets.

Ballistic missiles are also very difficult to intercept due to the speed and altitude they attain. Several interceptors are usually required to ensure each incoming missile is stopped. Iran is also using cluster munitions on some of its ballistic missiles, which further compounds the problem.

Iran has cheap, easy-to-replace drones, which it is using to try to overwhelm Israeli and American air defense systems, as well. These can also be launched from dispersed locations that are difficult to detect, making them harder to destroy on the ground than ballistic missiles.

Iran has so far launched more than 500 missiles and 2,000 drones since the war began.

Jet fighters can help defend against these drone attacks and have done so with great success, but the missiles they fire are also more expensive than the drones themselves. And other weapons platforms (such as the Iron Beam) are currently in limited supply.

The US and Israel are not the only ones reportedly running low on interceptors. The Persian Gulf states have also come under Iranian attack, and are burning through what defensive assets they have.

The Iranians have specifically targeted missile defense radars across the region, with reports they have successfully destroyed or damaged several systems.

All of this, of course, raises the question of why Israel and the US would start another conflict in the first place if their stockpiles were not fully replenished. There could be several potential reasons:

they had managed to rebuild their stockpiles faster than anyone anticipated, though this is unlikely they were confident they could destroy a sufficient amount of Iran's offensive weapons before they ran out of defensive munitions they believed Iran would want to end the war sooner than it has.

How long can Iran sustain the attacks?

There's no way of knowing what Iran's strategy is, besides extending the war as long as possible and creating chaos in the region and with global energy markets.

Some have speculated Iran may be deliberately holding back its more advanced missile technologies to use after the US and Israeli interceptors are depleted. But other analysts say there is no evidence this is the case. This would also be a risky strategy on Iran's part.