The U.S. is holding off arms supplies for Taiwan. Reason for the war on Iran

The war on Iran begins to have consequences far beyond the Middle East. Part of Taiwan's arms supply has been temporarily halted because Washington needs to replenish supplies after intense military action.

That's an important signal. Even the most important allied commitments today depend not only on political declarations, but on how many missiles really are in US Armed Forces magazines.

Taiwan's on the other end.

During the hearing before the Senate Defense Subcommittee acting as Secretary of the U.S. Navy Hung Cao confirmed the temporary suspension of arms supply parts for Taiwan. The decision was justified by the needs of operations "Epic Fury", or military actions carried out by the United States against Iran.

It's not about a little shopping program. We are talking about an arms and military equipment package worth approximately $14 billion, which is intended to strengthen Taiwan's defence capacity against increasing pressure from China.

According to media reports, the package was primarily intended to include missile and anti-aircraft weapons, including PAC-3 MSE capture missiles to Patriot systems and NASAMS missiles. There are also HIMARS launchers, ATACMS missiles and anti-tank and anti-drone systems. However, the full range of stopped deliveries was not explicitly confirmed by the US administration.

The problem is therefore more serious than the mere delay in deliveries. It shows that the U.S. defence industry and weapons stocks are stretched between several directions simultaneously today.

The Middle East is thus beginning to influence Indo-Pacific and the war with Iran – the situation in the Taiwan Strait.

The war against Iran consumes huge amounts of countermeasures

According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the operation "Epic Fury" involves significant consumption combat measures. Public studies show estimates of the use of over a thousand Tomahawk maneuvering missiles and over a thousand Patriot missiles.

Whatever the exact numbers, one thing is certain. Modern conflicts use weapons at a rate that many planners had not assumed until a few years ago.

This applies particularly to maneuvering and anti-aircraft missiles. Their production takes time, specialized components and an efficient supply chain.

Lockheed Martin entry on PAC-3 MSE, PrSM and GMLRS production lines in Camden. This is an example of pressure on the American arms industry in parallel crises.

It is precisely such establishments today that decide whether the political declarations of Washington can be quickly translated into real arms supplies.

Therefore, it is not only the development of new weapons systems that is increasingly challenging for the Pentagon. Equally important is the maintenance of supplies allowing to operate in parallel in several directions.

This is where the trouble begins.

In the case of Taiwan, the problem does not end with warehouses and production lines. It is increasingly clear that arms supplies are also becoming part of a political game between Washington and Beijing.

Armed forces as a political tool

There's a hypothesis here that no one officially confirms. The decision to suspend part of the supply for Taiwan was made only a few days after Donald Trump's visit to Beijing and talks with Xi Jinping.

Moreover, the US president previously described Taiwan's weaponry as a "tender card" in relations with China.

That sentence didn't go unnoticed. Both Republican politicians and Indo-Pacific observers drew attention to them.

The problem is not only with delayed deliveries. It's about the signal Beijing can take.

The deterrence works when the opponent sees consistency, predictability and readiness to act. If uncertainty arises around arms supplies for Taiwan, China They may find it worthwhile to see where the limit of American commitments really goes.

This does not, of course, mean that Washington has abandoned Taiwan. However, it shows that political declarations increasingly collide with industrial constraints, warehouses and current needs.

It's not the contract that matters, it's the delivery.

A few years ago, the signing of the arms purchase agreement was considered an important step towards strengthening the defence. Today's just the beginning of the road.

The importance of the contract is determined not by the signature itself, but by whether the equipment will actually arrive in time.

The missiles on the production line do not strengthen the defence of any State. The real value is only when it is produced, received by the contracting authority and entered into service.

From Taiwan's perspective, the difference is fundamental. In a situation of increasing tension around the island, it is not the value of the signed contracts that counts, but the number of launchers, radars and missiles actually on site.

The same problem can be seen in the Ormuz Strait

A similar relationship can be seen in the Middle East. Crisis around Ormuz Strait has shown that formal freedom of navigation does not always mean the possibility of safe passage through the areas.

For shipowners and ship operators, it is not political declarations that matter, but actual transition conditions, risk levels and insurance costs.

Weapons are similar. Its importance is determined not by the fact that the system exists, but by the possibility of using it in a specific place and time.

Iran, Ormuz, and Taiwan are beginning to form one picture. This is a picture of a world where resources are limited and simultaneous crises quickly expose the weaknesses of even the greatest powers.

Test for the American arms industry

The matter of halting supplies to Taiwan is primarily a warning to the American defence industry.

The United States remains the world's greatest military power. But even they have to face production constraints and the need to replenish stocks after intense armed action.

The coming months will show whether American plants will be able to increase production pace enough to support action in the Middle East at the same time and maintain the credibility of deterrence against China.

For Taiwan, it's a security issue.

For Washington – a test of the ability to conduct global politics in several directions simultaneously.

For the world – the signal that in the 21st century the power of power is determined not only by the number of weapon systems, but also by the pace at which they can be produced, supplemented and supplied to allies.