CFR Report Takeaways: How to Reshape U.S. Defense Production to Counter China

Council on Foreign Relations  |  Michael C. Horowitz

Operation Epic Fury and conflict with Iran have severely depleted United States stocks of critical air defense interceptors and precision-guided munitions, exposing dangerous defense industrial bottlenecks ahead of potential confrontation with China over Taiwan. Department of Defense reliance on exquisite, high-cost platforms cannot resolve these inventory shortfalls within the critical two-year operational window required to deter near-term aggression in the Western Pacific.

Council on Foreign Relations analysis indicates that rapid replenishment requires transitioning to precise mass systems—lower-cost, highly attritable, autonomous drones and sensors leveraging commercial manufacturing lines and tactical lessons from Ukraine. Accelerating this shift requires the Pentagon to grant program offices authority to prioritize production schedules, accept higher procurement risks, and build resilient component supply chains. Furthermore, Congress must establish multiyear budget commitments to provide defense contractors with stable demand signals, ensuring mass capabilities can be fielded on a wartime footing before conflict begins.

Comment

The primary friction in rapidly scaling precise mass lies in component-level manufacturing dependencies rather than final system assembly. Transitioning from exquisite munitions like the RIM-174 Standard ERAM (SM-6) to attritable UAS architectures shifts vulnerability down to sub-tier suppliers producing printed circuit board assemblies and optical sensors. While commercial drone fabrication bypasses traditional prime contractors, it remains heavily reliant on dual-use microcontrollers and brushless motors predominantly sourced through East Asian supply chains.

This structural dependency limits the operational throughput of DoD rapid acquisition pathways like the Replicator initiative. Deploying lower-cost platforms in volume requires sustained access to commercial component foundries that lack priority defense ratings under current Defense Production Act Title III allocations. Consequently, scaling high-rate production through Other Transaction Authority agreements risks encountering immediate component bottlenecks before reaching required inventory thresholds.

Strategic Question for Discussion

Which constraint presents the greater impediment to scaling attritable mass for potential Western Pacific scenarios—sub-tier component dependencies in commercial supply chains or the transition from Other Transaction Authority prototypes to multi-year procurement, and why?

The available evidence points toward sub-tier component dependencies as the more critical vulnerability. While the Department of Defense can alter acquisition rules through expanded Other Transaction Authority usage, resolving dual-use supply chain exposure for printed circuit boards and microcontrollers requires long-term capital expenditure and industrial re-shoring. Consequently, contracting flexibility alone cannot prevent production halts if commercial component imports are disrupted during a crisis.

Share your assessment in the comments below.

To read in details click here