The Trump administration’s decision to halt the delivery of some weapons to Ukraine, citing a Pentagon review of its dwindling stockpiles, was a long-held concern for Kyiv that finally became a reality.

The weapons the United States has provided have been critical for Ukraine’s defense; however, concerns over the U.S.’s diminishing stockpiles, reduced by giving equipment and weapons to Ukraine throughout the conflict, predate the Trump administration.

Recommended Stories

• Iran nuclear program set back one to two years: Pentagon
• Trump ending Elon Musk’s federal contracts faces legal and national security problems
• Pentagon halts some weapons shipments to Ukraine, citing low US stockpiles

It’s unclear how expansive the pause is or whether this will be the beginning of the end of U.S. military support for Ukraine entirely. Outside of the Pentagon, it’s also unknown just how low current Department of Defense stockpiles have gotten, though officials maintain that the military still has the means to deter adversaries and carry out operations as it did in Iran last month.

On Wednesday, Pentagon chief spokesman Sean Parnell told reporters that the department would not publicly divulge which munitions or systems were provided to Ukraine or the timelines associated with these possible transfers.

The decision, while in line with the administration’s overarching strategy toward Russia and Ukraine, is somewhat surprising, given that last week, President Donald Trump said, “We’re going to see if we can make some available,” regarding Ukraine’s desire for additional U.S. air defenses.

While the previous administration shared the concern, they viewed Ukraine’s victory on the battlefield as a vital U.S. interest. In contrast, the current administration has prioritized securing a diplomatic solution, with little success so far, to end Russia’s war, even if it comes at Ukraine’s expense.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told senators in June that the U.S. “is committed to peace in that conflict ” when asked directly which party in the war he “wants to win.”

His sentiment, which the administration has widely shared, makes the current announcement unsurprising, even as their efforts to negotiate an end to the war have fallen flat due to Russia’s demands.

U.S. stockpiles

The U.S. military’s air defenses have been stretched thin in recent years, and Parnell blamed the previous administration for the current situation.

“I think that for a long time, four years under the Biden administration, we were giving away weapons and munitions without really thinking about how many we have,” he said Wednesday.

In addition to its aid to Ukraine, the department surged military assistance to Israel, helping them thwart multiple barrages of Iranian missiles in April and October of 2024 and again in June 2025 during the Israel-Iran war, and the U.S. military has carried out nearly two months of operations against the Houthis in Yemen.

The military also recently defended the Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar against a telegraphed Iranian retaliatory attack. Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Staff, called it the “largest single Patriot engagement in the U.S. military.”

The crews manning the Patriot two patriot batteries involved in defending the air base were deployed from South Korea and Japan, Caine said, emphasizing the department’s frequent shuffling of air defense systems across the globe.

Adm. Samuel Paparo, the head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, told lawmakers in April that it took 73 C-17 cargo planes to transfer one Patriot system from the region to the Middle East.

It came on the heels of the nearly two-month-long U.S. military operation against the Houthis to restore Freedom of Navigation in the Red Sea.

Adm. James Kilby, the acting chief of naval operations, told lawmakers last month that the Navy is using the standard missile interceptor, known as an SM-3, at “an alarming rate,” amid the conflict in the Middle East.

Paparo said in November 2024 that it would be “dishonest” to claim the diversion of U.S. aid to Ukraine and Israel wasn’t impacting stockpiles.

“With some of the Patriots that have been employed, some of the air-to-air missiles that have been employed, it’s now eating into stocks, and to say otherwise would be dishonest,” Paparo said, according to Reuters. “Inherently, it imposes costs on the readiness of America to respond in the Indo-Pacific region, which is the most stressing theater for the quantity and quality of munitions, because the PRC [People’s Republic of China] is the most capable potential adversary in the world.”

The Pentagon has sought and continues to work with defense contractors to pick up production from the defense industrial base, but it doesn’t happen overnight.

“For our interests, and to stop Putin from taking a sovereign country in Europe, Congress needs to lead the effort to rebuild our defense industrial base here at home. It creates good-paying American jobs, including in Michigan, and makes us safer and more secure,” Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bridget Brink told the Washington Examiner. “This is how we continue to lead the free world.”

Russia

Russia is celebrating the news of the halted shipments and believes the decision could prompt its victory.

“As far as we understand, the reason for the decision was empty warehouses, but the fewer weapons supplied to Ukraine, the closer the end of the ‘special military operation,’” Russian presidential spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday.

Russian officials have long believed that they could outlast U.S. and Western support for Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin’s “theory of victory is that he can outlast any sort of significant western support for Ukraine, and that, therefore, that will kneecap the Ukrainians’ ability to reverse Russian gains on the battlefield,” George Barros, an expert with the Institute for Study of War, told the Washington Examiner. “So long as the Russians have patience and the willingness to be able to outlast fickle Western support, then Putin thinks he can win.”

The decision to halt this aid ultimately benefits Russia, weakening Ukraine’s defenses on the battlefield. However, it may take some time for the effects to show, as in previous instances when the U.S. temporarily stopped various aspects of its support.

The U.S. temporarily stopped sharing intelligence with Ukraine in the aftermath of the Trump-Zelensky blowup in the Oval Office, which resulted in delayed consequences on the front lines.

Based on what happened then, Barros predicts Russia’s attacks “will accelerate,” while Ukraine’s “ability to defend themselves will become more difficult, and more Ukrainian service members and civilians are likely going to be killed.”

Brink said the administration’s decision “won’t end Russia’s war,” rather it will “result in more civilians and children being killed.”

Earlier this week, Russia hit Ukraine with what is believed to be its largest drone and missile attack of the conflict. Ukraine’s air force said the bombardment included a total of 477 drones and 60 missiles.

Caine told lawmakers in the same hearing that Hegseth declined to specify if he wanted Ukraine to prevail and that he didn’t “believe” Putin would stop at Ukraine if they had continued battlefield success.

Ceasefire negotiations

The Trump administration has held several iterations of talks with Russia to discuss ending the war diplomatically, but those efforts have not yet produced results.

Russian officials have maintained hardline stances in negotiations, which guarantee them the victories they seek that are unattainable to them on the battlefield.

PENTAGON HALTS SOME WEAPONS SHIPMENTS TO UKRAINE, CITING LOW US STOCKPILES

Conversely, Ukrainian leaders have entered into the critical minerals agreement with the U.S. as a roundabout way to repay the U.S. for the aid already provided, and they have sought to purchase U.S. weapons instead of simply accepting them free of charge.

Pulling U.S. support for Ukraine will only hurt the administration’s efforts to end the war, according to experts, because it reinforces Putin’s belief he can outlast the West.

“My initial thought was not surprised but disappointed in the sense that I expected the opposite,” Charles Kupchan, a fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Washington Examiner. “I saw Trump getting frustrated with Putin, feeling that Putin was playing him and not negotiating in good faith to end the war and that, as a consequence, Trump would understand that he needs to increase the coercive pressure on the Kremlin by making sure that Ukraine has what it needs to defend itself.”

The Senate is currently considering legislation to impose additional sanctions on Russia.