In a recent appearance on Tucker Carlson’s political talk show, prominent American author and geopolitical analyst Brandon Weichert has delivered a scathing assessment of the US-Iran ceasefire memorandum of understanding, reached after months of joint US-Israeli military action against Iran, calling the document nothing less than a formal conditional surrender by the United States.
Weichert’s core argument centers on the massive drawdown of American missile stockpiles over the course of the conflict, which he says left the Trump administration with no viable option but to enter negotiations and accept a deal that ultimately handed Iran a strategic victory.
“Ultimately, this is a conditional surrender document,” Weichert stated during the interview. “The United States started a war and it promptly lost. The Iranians have, unfortunately, at a strategic level, achieved victory.” He added that while the Trump administration had no other choice given the pressing timeline of looming resource shortages that left it backed into a corner, the end result remains a surrender regardless of the administration’s reasoning.
Weichert’s controversial remarks land amid intense ongoing partisan and policy debate over the text of the memorandum, which establishes a foundational framework for sustained diplomatic negotiations between Washington and Tehran and codifies the ceasefire that halted months of open military confrontation between the two sides. Citing only unclassified, publicly available data on American weapons usage throughout the conflict, Weichert laid out staggering figures for depleted US munitions inventories.
According to his analysis, roughly half of the United States’ total stockpile of Patriot ballistic missile interceptors were fired during the war, alongside between 50% and 80% of the nation’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) interceptors. Weichert also claimed that more than 1,000 Tomahawk cruise missiles — approximately one-third of the entire US stockpile — were expended in the conflict. He added that large numbers of JASSM air-to-surface standoff missiles were used, and that nearly the entire pre-war inventory of newly produced Precision Strike Missiles was completely consumed in military operations.
Beyond ground and air-launched munitions, Weichert argued that US naval forces faced far greater and more underreported threats during the kinetic phase of the war than the White House has publicly acknowledged. “The Navy reports that they expended large quantities of their SM-3 and SM-6 naval interceptors,” he said. “That indicates to me, if I may conjecture here, that there must have been one hell of a fight over the security of our ships when the war was in its kinetic phase.” From these figures, he concluded that the White House deliberately misled the public when it claimed US naval vessels operating in the region remained completely safe throughout the conflict, arguing the high interceptor expenditure proves American ships faced severe, unacknowledged risks.
One of the most alarming parts of Weichert’s assessment is his projection of multi-year delays to replenish these drained arsenals. According to his timeline, Precision Strike Missiles can be fully restocked by the end of this year, while JASSM inventories will not be fully replaced until the middle of 2026. Naval SM-3 and SM-6 interceptors, he estimates, will not be back to pre-war levels until 2028. Patriot and THAAD interceptor stockpiles could take until roughly 2030 to fully replenish, and Tomahawk cruise missile inventories may require another five years to restore.
“So, we’d better hope that the Chinese or some other area of interest is no longer requiring our assistance because we have depleted ourselves,” Weichert warned.
Weichert’s analysis aligns with a recent bombshell report from *The New York Times*, which revealed that former President Trump and senior Pentagon leaders have been pressuring major defense contractors to speed up weapons production, while simultaneously pushing Congress to approve an extra $70 billion in funding to cover war costs and restock depleted arsenals. The *Times* reporting confirms that defense companies have told the Trump administration that expanding production capacity will require massive new capital investment, and the administration’s funding request is already projected to face fierce bipartisan opposition on Capitol Hill. The *Times* also independently verified the broad scope of US munitions depletion, confirming that the military used roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles, more than 1,000 Tomahawk missiles, over 1,200 Patriot interceptors, and more than 1,000 Precision Strike and ATACMS missiles throughout the conflict.
Beyond the immediate military implications of drawn-down stockpiles, Weichert argued that the conflict has accelerated an irreversible long-term geopolitical shift across the Middle East, moving the region rapidly toward what he calls a “post-American” order that diminishes the central role Israel has played for decades as the anchor of Washington’s regional security architecture.
“There is now going to be a new Middle East,” he said, outlining his prediction that five regional powers will shape the future balance of power in the area: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, and Turkey. Weichert argued that Turkey’s rapidly expanding domestic defense industry, Pakistan’s established nuclear capabilities, and the competing regional influence of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Egypt will combine to form a new regional order that is far less dependent on Washington for security and governance. “Those greater Middle East powers are gonna form a new post-American order,” he said. “Where it goes from here really is up to Mr Netanyahu and his government.”
To date, the White House and senior US military officials have publicly defended the memorandum, framing it as a favorable deal that advances US national interests. Even so, the Trump administration has faced widespread criticism from across the US political spectrum for failing to achieve the core stated objectives it laid out at the start of the conflict, including removing the Iranian government, permanently weakening Iran’s regional influence, and decimating its military capabilities.