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 forpossible 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