Aid to Ukraine turned into a shortage of ammunition for the United States: should we expect a reduction in supplies

– Vladimir Semenovich, what is really hard to believe is the lack of production capacity in the United States. What really happened there that they started talking about a crisis in the production of ammunition?

– As often happens, there was an error in predicting military events. It would seem that everyone knows the thesis that the generals are allegedly preparing for past wars. And now all the generals seem to be trying with all their might to predict future wars and prepare for them, taking into account, of course, the experience of past battles. But they are still wrong. So, on the eve of World War I, in all European armies, including both Russian and German, it was believed that more than one thousand shells would be enough for each artillery barrel for a year – and the war itself would last no more than one or two, well, maximum – three months. However, in a month each gun fired three thousand shells. And in all the armies, the so-called “shell hunger” immediately began. And then – and cartridge. Another thing is that each country has overcome it in different ways, depending on the development of industry. The same thing happened today in Ukraine.

– The Ukrainian army, it turns out, has already exceeded the “plan” for the consumption of ammunition?

– Not that word! The American channel CNBC reported that the annual output of only 155-mm shells, and this is 30 thousand pieces, is spent by the Armed Forces of Ukraine in just two weeks. As the presenter explained, now you can’t count on deliveries of 155-mm shells from the United States – their stocks will only be enough to train their troops, maintain their combat readiness and reserve arsenals in case of war in other theaters (China, North Korea, Northern Europe). As a result, the 155-mm guns delivered by the Armed Forces of Ukraine will have to be replaced by a 105-mm howitzer, “which has a smaller payload and firing range.”

But there are also other ammunition. Stocks were also limited. Such as MLRS HIMARS, ATGM Javelin, MANPADS Stinger. Thus, the United States annually produces about 800 Javelin launchers. And about 8.5 thousand have already been transferred to Ukraine – this is the volume of production for more than a decade. Can you imagine how wrong the forecast turned out to be, and hence the planning of NATO strategists regarding the consumption of ammunition? In fact, they will have to rethink the entire strategy and even the concept of combat supply and support for the troops.

– Well, it’s not a big problem for the Americans – they miscalculated a little, it’s not them who are dying. Do they have the opportunity to increase production?

– Of course, although for this they will have to significantly modernize the very structure and management scheme of this branch of the military industry.

In this regard, of interest is the US Congressional Research Service policy brief dated November 18, “Industrial Base for the Production of Conventional Ammunition.” There is a key to solving this problem – a link to the report of the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) for 2022. The report stated that complex organizational relationships and outdated policy documents “could hinder effective coordination and lead to poor or belated decision-making” between the numerous army organizations responsible for the munitions production base.

– What, bureaucratic obstacles interfere again? And how is the production of ammunition in the USA generally organized?

– The same congressional brief specifically noted that a conventional munitions industrial base is a collective term for U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) industrial facilities that produce conventional ammunition, fuel, and explosives for use by the military.

Such munitions include small (0.50 caliber and smaller), medium (20 to 40 mm) and large (50 to 155 mm) caliber ammunition, direct fire, indirect fire and rocket fire, and various explosives. These manufacturing facilities are primarily concentrated in the US Army’s five Government Contractor Operated (GOCO) Ordnance Manufacturing Plants (AAPs). At the same time, the army provides command and control on behalf of the US Department of Defense.

– Still, the factories are state-owned, not private?

“Ammo is too vital. The most perfect machine gun or cannon is a piece of unnecessary iron, if there is nothing to shoot from them. Therefore, entrusting such an important matter to a private trader who can make a mistake, go bankrupt, change the type of activity or product, is very risky. However, there are also private industries, but they do not play the main role.

The modern U.S. munitions manufacturing base dates back to World War I, when the War Industries Board sponsored a rapid expansion of government and contract manufacturing capacity to meet wartime munitions needs. A similar industrial mobilization occurred during World War II, leaving 86 munitions factories in the United States by 1945. During the Cold War, this number declined as inventories increased and manufacturing processes became more efficient. In 1975, the Department of Defense also consolidated munitions management by appointing the Secretary of Defense as a Single Conventional Munitions Manager (SMCA).

Today, GOCO’s five factories supply the military with most of its conventional ammunition, fuel and explosives. In addition, there are other facilities that, within the broader army industrial base, perform certain production functions related to ammunition. This is a dozen industrial sites to support the development, production, modification, storage, maintenance, distribution, disposal and demilitarization of ammunition. Even the production of shells.

– How much money is allocated for the production of ammunition?

– In fiscal year 2022, Congress appropriated approximately $3.8 billion for munitions purchases, including $588 million for investment in industrial facilities. The U.S. Congress funds the purchase of munitions through the annual National Defense Appropriations Act (NDAA) and defense appropriations legislation.

– So what is the complexity of relations between overseeing army organizations, which was seen by the Accounts Chamber of the American government?

– Because there are too many of them. And seven nannies, as you know, have a child without an eye. Here is a list of army organizations that provide management and oversight of the ammunition production base.

The Secretary of the Army (SECARMY) is responsible for the Department of Defense SMCA mission, which includes 15 munitions-related functions (they are detailed in Department of Defense Instruction 5160.68). SECARMY has delegated SMCA policy development and oversight responsibilities to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)). That is, within the ASA (ALT) it is the head of the joint program.

The Arms and Munitions Office (JPEO A&A) manages funding and sets broad acquisition strategies. Two more subordinate commands of the Army Materiel Command (AMC) are involved in the day-to-day mission of the SMCA. This is the Joint Munitions Command (JMC), which oversees the GOCO factories and other munitions bases. And the Army Contracts Command (ACC), which deals with the distribution of contracts and their administration. In addition, the Army Futures Command (AFC) conducts research and development and provides engineering support for ammunition manufacturing through its Combat Capabilities Development Arms Command Center.

It is not surprising that from time to time their interests, especially financial ones, intersect and there is, to put it mildly, a misunderstanding.

Is Congress going to reduce the number of controllers?

“Congress may consider whether to direct the Army to review its command structure to establish clearer roles and responsibilities for all of these handlers. But they are more concerned with modernizing factories, many of which were built during or before World War II. To modernize them, the Army has developed a three-phase plan to invest $16 billion from fiscal year 2024 to 2038.

The Fiscal Year 2023 House Armed Services Committee report expressed support for the plan, and Congress may reprioritize Army investments, monitor implementation, and consider future appropriations. Americans are also concerned about the security of the supply chain.

– What’s wrong here?

– A lot is wrong. At some stages of the production of ammunition, raw materials are used that are sourced outside the United States, which creates potential supply problems. For example, the current lack of an internal source of antimony, used to harden lead alloys for bullets, has caused congressional concern. As it turned out, more than 75% of world supplies come from China and Russia. Congress could look into relevant supply chain risks and consider directing the Department of Defense to stockpile materials of concern and encourage domestic production of critical materials.

– And yet, how are the Americans going to mitigate the potential shortage of ammunition, at least at first?

– The notorious “patching holes” begins. In September 2022, Congress allocated $540 million to increase the capacity of munitions factories to support Ukraine and may continue to invest to meet the steady growth in demand. Congress may also direct the Department of Defense to continue to identify ammunition shortages, preparedness implications, and mitigation strategies. But all this in the near future will be only loud declarations and good intentions.