Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

Exposed in Iran: US Military Woes Strip Trump of His Beijing Bargaining Chips

Blog

Exposed in Iran: US Military Woes Strip Trump of His Beijing Bargaining Chips
Blog

Blog

Exposed in Iran: US Military Woes Strip Trump of His Beijing Bargaining Chips

2026-05-14 09:43 Last Updated At:09:43

Trump had long anticipated his trip to Beijing to meet President Xi — and it has finally come to pass. He had originally hoped to arrive bearing a US-Iran peace deal as a diplomatic trophy. Instead, Iran bogged him down in a deadlock of "no victory, no war, no withdrawal," leaving him empty-handed and embarrassed.

The New York Times published a piece warning that the US military's weaknesses have been laid bare, eroding Trump's bargaining position ahead of his visit to Beijing.

The New York Times published a piece warning that the US military's weaknesses have been laid bare, eroding Trump's bargaining position ahead of his visit to Beijing.

The Iran campaign has laid bare a string of serious military weaknesses. Repeated setbacks on the battlefield, stretched weapons stockpiles, and heavily damaged bases have left the US military in a deeply uncomfortable position. The New York Times recently published a piece warning that America has been exposed — and that rivals now view it as a "lame giant" — materially undermining Trump's hand ahead of his meeting with President Xi.

Meanwhile, a Democratic senator, citing classified Pentagon documents, has gone public with a stark warning: key US weapons stockpiles have plummeted to critical alert levels. The Iran campaign has rapidly depleted advanced systems — including Tomahawk cruise missiles, the THAAD system, and Patriot interceptor missiles — and none can be replenished immediately. Should a conflict erupt in the Taiwan Strait under these conditions, America's military position would be extremely vulnerable.

The numbers are staggering. The New York Times, citing internal Pentagon estimates, reported that since the US launched its war against Iran in late February, America has expended roughly half of its long-range cruise missiles. The number of Tomahawk cruise missiles fired is approximately ten times the annual procurement volume. That is not just a statistic — it is a flashing red light.

Military analysts warn the implications go deeper than depleted shelves. The Iran campaign has not only drained vast quantities of ammunition, but has also shaken America's long-established dominance. More critically, it has exposed a fundamental flaw: in a sustained military conflict, US weapons production capacity falls far short of the rate of consumption.

The strategic damage extends beyond the Middle East. Analysts noted that if the US cannot achieve a swift victory even against Iran, it would face far greater difficulty prevailing against China — a near-peer adversary. That calculus, they argue, weakens Trump's position heading into his talks with President Xi.

The Iran war has bled US weapons stockpiles dry, with Patriot missiles hitting critical lows. The real culprit? A rigid government and a stubborn defense industry choking off production.

The Iran war has bled US weapons stockpiles dry, with Patriot missiles hitting critical lows. The real culprit? A rigid government and a stubborn defense industry choking off production.

The New York Times also cited a Global Times editorial warning that if the US is unable to deploy its weapons globally, it risks becoming a "lame giant."

The roots of this weakness run deep. An earlier New York Times editorial offered a detailed breakdown, arguing that the Iran campaign has exposed the US military's inadequate real-world combat capability. The cause, the editorial argued, lies in prolonged dysfunction in government governance — dysfunction that has severely hampered military and defense industry reforms.

One glaring example is industrial capacity. The Tomahawk cruise missile — consumed at an extraordinary rate in this campaign — is manufactured by a single defense plant. Patriot interceptor missiles have faced chronic shortages for years. The country simply cannot produce battlefield-critical equipment at the required scale.

The editorial traced the problem to its source: a rigid government system and a defense industry resistant to change, allowing deep-seated problems to fester unchecked. Five major defense contractors dominate procurement. New technology companies find it nearly impossible to break into the supply chain. Defense Secretary Hegseth summoned defense contractors and pressed for sweeping reforms — but the Pentagon itself is mired in internal conflict and dysfunction, rendering the calls for reform little more than hollow slogans with minimal real impact.

The New York Times editorial candidly acknowledged that “The good news is that Congress, the administration and the Pentagon can all now see our military shortcomings. The bad news is that our adversaries can see them too.” Without decisive reform, the setbacks in Iran could prove to be "a preview of far worse."

Beyond media coverage, the alarm is now coming from inside the chamber. Democratic Senator Mark Kelly recently went public with damning disclosures: advanced US weapons stockpiles have plummeted to critical alert levels. Drawing on classified Pentagon documents, Kelly revealed that key systems — including Tomahawk cruise missiles, the THAAD system, and Patriot interceptor missiles — have been heavily depleted in the Iran campaign and cannot be replenished immediately.

Kelly warned that under these circumstances, should the US become embroiled in another conflict — including a possible confrontation with China in the Western Pacific — America's position would be extremely vulnerable. The US military would lack the capacity to sustain a war measured in months or years.

The fiscal situation adds yet another layer of peril. The Pentagon is awaiting congressional approval for additional defense funding to pay defense contractors and accelerate restocking of depleted weapons arsenals. Should legislators play politics and obstruct the process, the military could find itself in a dire "empty pot" predicament.

Make no mistake: China — America's principal strategic rival — sees these military shortcomings "just as clearly," as the New York Times editorial put it. Trump's visit to Beijing will therefore carry far less of the leverage it once might have commanded. His bargaining chips are considerably diminished.

Lai Ting-yiu




What Say You?

** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **

America's press-freedom myth just took a serious hit. The Justice Department has subpoenaed four New York Times reporters over an alleged violation of federal criminal law. The FBI has opened its own investigation. Both moves target the paper's exposé on inadequate anti-missile defenses aboard the president's new plane.

Defense Secretary Hegseth unveils "mole-hunt squad," vowing to root out leakers feeding reporters.

Defense Secretary Hegseth unveils "mole-hunt squad," vowing to root out leakers feeding reporters.

The White House has long nursed grudges against the press. Now, in a fury, it has escalated from threats to outright intimidation, deploying subpoenas and detentions alike. As the saying goes, there is no smoke without fire. Someone inside government must be leaking, and that conviction pushed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to announce a special task force. Working hand-in-hand with the Justice Department, the task force aims to root out the "moles."

The showdown between the White House and the press is only heating up, and the real fireworks may still lie ahead.

Trump's sudden switch to the old Air Force One after NATO sparked media exposés, igniting his fury and a subpoena crackdown.

Trump's sudden switch to the old Air Force One after NATO sparked media exposés, igniting his fury and a subpoena crackdown.

The Plane-Swap Spark

The trigger behind this clash was the so-called "plane-swap incident." After Trump wrapped up the NATO summit in Turkey, his security team abruptly switched him onto the old Air Force One for departure. He skipped the new plane gifted by Qatar entirely, and that alone raised eyebrows.

The New York Times soon reported why. The new aircraft's missile-defense systems were inadequate, the paper said, posing a security risk that forced officials to fall back on the old plane. The White House flatly denied the report, and Trump reportedly flew into a rage. The Justice Department wasted no time, issuing subpoenas to the paper's reporters almost immediately.

There is more to this story. FBI agents reportedly showed up at the New York Times offices before the story even went to print. They demanded the paper pull the piece and reveal its sources.

The paper's leadership flatly refused. In response, the Justice Department broke with convention. Rather than identifying the leaker first, it went straight after the reporters with subpoenas, escalating pressure on the press.

This is not the first time the White House has tried to put reporters in the hot seat. Back in April, a US Air Force F-15E was shot down over Iranian airspace and the pilot went missing after ejecting. Both the New York Times and Axios covered the story.

Iran's military happened to launch a massive search operation around the same time. Whether the two events were connected remains unclear. Still, Trump was quick to blame the media, threatening to jail both the reporters and the leaker.

The White House apparently could not find hard evidence, so it ultimately took no action. That failure only deepened its resentment toward the press, and officials waited for the right moment to strike back hard. This time, the plane-swap incident gave the administration its pretext to wield the legal hammer, and it is determined to teach reporters a lesson they will not forget.

The Pentagon's "Mole Hunt"

The crackdown on "moles" by the Defense Department and the Justice Department has also ramped up. Hegseth posted a video on X yesterday announcing that the Pentagon has teamed up with the Justice Department to form a special task force. Its mission: hunt down whoever has been feeding information to the media, and anyone caught with solid evidence will face the full force of the law.

He said the Pentagon's Office of General Counsel can now require any department unit to hand over information and records tied to leak investigations within 48 hours. Full cooperation is mandatory, with no room for delay or evasion. He also issued a stern warning, declaring that "access to confidential and secret information is a sacred trust, and those who betray that trust will be met with the full force of the law".

Both Hegseth and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche are die-hard Trump loyalists. That alone signals this crackdown comes directly from Trump himself, and it is designed to make heads roll, with some officials facing criminal charges. Even without hard evidence, suspects are still likely to be pushed out of their jobs.

The Pentagon has done this before. Last year it investigated several leak cases, resulting in a number of officials being suspended, including Deputy Chief of Staff Darin Selnick and Senior Adviser Dan Caldwell. Both have since quietly disappeared from their posts.

A Hunt That Cannot Succeed

Some analysts point out a hard truth. Hegseth may be on the warpath, but the Pentagon's "mole problem" could prove impossible to fully stamp out. Since Trump's return and Hegseth's takeover of the Defense Department, internal personnel purges have stirred up widespread resentment, making it easy for reporters to find disgruntled insiders willing to talk. With so many potential leakers around, there is no way to seal every crack.

Hegseth himself is not exactly clean either. Shortly after taking office, he got caught up in the "Signalgate" scandal, leaking secret plans for a US strike on Houthi forces in a group chat. That controversy caused quite the uproar. Having broken the rules himself, how can he expect his subordinates to keep their mouths shut without complaint?

Perhaps the funniest comment came from a netizen who suggested the task force should start by investigating the bartender at Hegseth's favorite watering hole. Given his well-known fondness for drink, the odds of him spilling military secrets over a few rounds are hardly low. In the end, they might just discover that the real "leaker" was Hegseth all along.

Recommended Articles