WASHINGTON — In recent weeks, a number of allies and partners have been told their expected weapons deliveries from the United States are being slowed down as the US prioritizes its own coffers, sending shockwaves through defense communities in Europe and Asia that have come to rely on US weapons.
And while analysts tell Breaking Defense there has yet to be any sense of a major shift away from buying American weapons, they acknowledge that the decision to kick allies back down the queue, especially when those countries have already put money down, fits into a broader pattern of concerns around American arm sales that could lead countries to look for possible alternatives.
“What we’re going to see is the inevitable tension between the administration’s stated desire to have our allies buy American and buy more … and likewise the need to put ourselves first to replenish stockpiles,” Tom Karako, a missile defense expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), told Breaking Defense.
While questions about US reliability over the past year have cropped up on an array of topics from NATO to Ukraine, there was less concern about Foreign Military Sales (FMS), especially as the Trump administration pushed forward large numbers of FMS cases and cast arms sales as an economic boon for American workers.
According to figures gathered by TD Cowen analyst Roman Schweizer, FMS cases have been approved by the State Department at a record pace this year. Of those, 29 deals ($47 billion) are for the Middle East and Africa; 25 deals ($28.6 billion) for Europe; 25 deals ($19.9 billion) for Asia; and four deals ($6.4 billion) in the Americas. While FMS announcements do not include exact dollar figures or quantities for what a final sale may look like, they still serve as a barometer of interest in American weapons around the globe.
But 2026 is shaping up to be a potentially transformative year for FMS.
In early February, President Donald Trump inked an executive order calling for national production interests to be taken into greater account when the US sells foreign nations weapons, creating a new list of platforms to push on the market, and prioritizing arms sales for countries who invest more in their own defense spending. The administration has yet to unfurl those changes, but they have already begun to make some abroad uneasy — particularly the language about prioritizing some countries over others, in lieu of the largely “first in, first out” FMS operation.
Then came Operation Epic Fury, which saw the US burning through key munitions at high rates over Iran.
How many weapons? In a recent CSIS report, the think tank estimated that the US launched more than 1,000 Tomahawk missiles, and warned it could take until the 2030-2031 timeframe to return to the pre-war inventory. The organization estimated the US expended 1,060 to 1,430 Patriot rounds, and may not be able to hit its pre-war inventory until mid-2029. Similar trends followed for an array of munitions including the SM-3, SM-6 and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors.
While the administration is pursuing plans to ramp up the production of 14 “critical munitions” over the coming years, building that capacity will take time, and is unlikely to help in the short term. And all of those weapons are of interest to allies and partners, many of whom already have orders in.
The impacts are seemingly being felt around the globe, with reports that Washington has been quietly notifying key allies and partners that their weapon shipments might be delayed due to the war:
- Taiwan: On May 21, Acting Secretary of the Navy Hung Cao told senators there was a “pause” on weapon deliveries to Taiwan “in order to make sure we have the munitions we need for Epic Fury … but then the Foreign Military Sales will continue when the administration deems necessary.”
- Japan: FT reported that the US has warned Japan that there could be serious delays in the delivery of 400 Tomahawk missiles since the Pentagon is prioritizing rebuilding weapons stockpiles.
- UK and Poland: FT reported in May that the US also warned these two countries about possible delivery delays.
- Norway: On May 1, Breaking Defense reported that Norway was “informed that delays may occur, but it is emphasized that no decision has been made,” according to a government spokesperson.
- Estonia and Lithuania: Reuters reported in April that the ministries of Estonia and Lithuania have said that the US has informed their countries of possible delays because of the Iran war.
- Switzerland: Washington decided to reshuffle Switzerland’s Patriot deliveries last year to support urgently needed supplies to Ukraine, with Breaking Defense reporting that Swiss delays could run up to five years. But that window is in doubt due to growing demand for the platform since the outbreak of the US-Israeli war with Iran. While Switzerland is deliberating over whether to cancel a long-delayed Patriot order, last week it announced the need for a “potential additional system” that is “preferably” produced in Europe. “This may be either a European system or a non-European system that is manufactured in Europe,” a government statement said.
When asked about reports of possible FMS delays due to ongoing operations in the Middle East, the State Department told Breaking Defense on May 28, “As a general matter, we don’t comment on the specifics of potential or pending arms transfers.” Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell did not directly respond to questions about the delay notifications or the process leading up to the notifications.
‘Musical Chairs’
One industry source plugged into the changing FMS landscape said that while industry is closely following the “rhetoric” around concerns from allies and partners, for now, FMS sales numbers remain high and the US continues to be the “provider of choice.”
“Yes, there is a broad concern out there about the reliability of the US,” the industry source told Breaking Defense. “I will tell you that [US] companies are moving very quickly to be able to invest, deliver, and do the [research and development] necessary to maintain the leading edge that we have enjoyed for many years.”
But the FMS reforms, combined with telling capitals that they may need to wait on planned weapon procurements, is “all probably going to contribute to uncertainty about the reliability of FMS deliveries,” Karako said, though he added that “I can’t really bring myself to say it’s wrong … We’ve gotten into this pickle, and we kind of do need to prioritize America’s arsenal first, replenishing the arsenal first.”
Elias Yousif, a Stimson Center fellow and deputy director for Conventional Defense, told Breaking Defense that, “we’re only just now starting to see the drivers that may reshape those trends, and a lot of the pressures that may lead even long-standing allies and partners to question whether or not it’s wise to continue to depend on the United States for essential defense articles and services.”
Michael Carpenter, a senior fellow for transatlantic affairs at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, told Breaking Defense he believes the perception of US dependability has dropped, and that lack of confidence is slowly seeping into the FMS arena.
“The bottom line is the US is becoming less dependable as a supplier, and so, as part of it, countries are calculating that if the US launches another war that comes out of left field in a year’s time, you know, will that mean that whatever system or capability they procured today is suddenly delayed by another year, two years, five years,” Carpenter said.
Another wrinkle emerged earlier this month when the Trump administration approved $8.6 billion in “emergency” arm sales to Israel, Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. Those potential deals include Patriot interceptors, Advanced Precision Kill Weapon Systems and the Integrated Battle Command System.
While Yousif said that maneuver could speed up the FMS process by up to a month, Karako said it is not clear if the Trump administration is also preparing to shake up the production queues and possibly place Qatar’s $4.01 billion order that included hundreds of Patriot interceptors ahead of other countries waiting in line.
“Where’s that [Qatar order] going to come from? We don’t know,” Karako said. “Do we start letting them get the next PAC-3 off the line? Or, do we take them out of the US inventory, which we can’t afford to do?
“Is this going to be a game of musical chairs? Who’s going to get moved to the front of the line and who’s going to lose their place in line that they’ve been waiting for?” he added. “[This is] going to have some potential to further rankle some of our allied relationships.”
It may take time some time to see if allies and partners look at alternatives, and possibly cheaper but lower-end options to US systems, Karako said, though he pointed to Denmark’s late-2025 decision to buy the French-Italian SAMP/T weapon systems over Raytheon’s rival Patriot platform.
“Why in the world would you go to French? The answer is not because of Greenland, but because the Danes knew that they were at the back of a very long line, a line which has gotten much, much longer in the past five months,” he added.
Yousif also pointed towards the same example out of Denmark, noting the timing — it came shortly after Trump revised his threats to invade Greenland, an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark — along with the slower pace and long lines for some US weapons.
“The United States both wants to have its cake and eat it too,” Yousif said. “It wants allies and partners to shoulder a greater degree of the international security burdens, to carry more weight in providing for their own security, but then also to have them buy American defense articles and services.”
“[But] the delays are certainly a problem, and that’s been cited by a lot of countries as to why they’ve chosen other fit systems,” he added.
Carpenter further cited Greenland as a pivotal turning point for some European allies and partners who are now slowly weighing their options to buy from other countries, while maintaining a sense of realism that, for instance, those who are tied into the F-35 program are pretty locked in for the future.
“I hear this all the time: We’re not going to just go cold turkey on the United States, but yes, we’re seriously considering alternatives to US equipment wherever and whenever we can,” Carpenter added.
For now, though, the industry source said he anticipates that the demand for US weapons will remain high.
“If you also talk to our companies, they will tell you that when they talk to the individual capitals, that there’s still a desire to work with US companies to develop systems that allow countries to provide for their own national security,” the industry source added.