How Arming Ukraine Exposed Cracks in the U.S. Defense Supply Chain | WSJ 

The Wagner Group has become the face of the Russian assault in Ukraine. Our documentary, Shadow Men: Inside Russia’s Secret War Company reveals how the Russian private military company hides the flow of riches and resources that ultimately connect to the Kremlin: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EMXnJMCoFYI.html

It’s actually really scary stuff when you realize that we went from over 50 primary contractors down to only five. It’s very similar to what happened in the baby formula industry when there was really only one supplier left and we ran out of baby formula nationwide. Very risky stuff.

To be fair, it made sense at the time. If it wasn't for the Russians invading Ukraine, all of those Javelins would be collecting dust in an armory somewhere and you'd have politicians crying about wasteful defense spending. You really can't win the supply game 100% of the time.

Corporate Tool: "Consolidation has left our industry inflexible and lacking innovation." Reporter: What can be done? Corporate Tool: "We need to consolidate more."

Not just in the defense industry. Apple, google, and meta control basically the internet in the USA. General Foods, Nestle and Kimberly and Clark control our food isles in the supermarkets. Oil is basically controlled by 4 major companies….and so on. Whenever a new company comes with something new or cheaper, it’s swallowed by a bigger company to eliminate it as a competitor. Truly sad times for our economic future and well being ✋🏻

Infantry wins battles, logistics wins wars. -Gen. Pershing

Every protracted war that has occurred after a long time of peace has shown massive supply issues. Like munition consumption during the Russo Japanese war, Artillery consumption during WW1. Its impossibly to have a cutting edge military, and retain the manufacturing capability to rapidly supply the army incase of a massive war.

I hate to oversimplify this, but Eisenhower did warn us to keep a close eye on all the effects the continually-evolving military-industrial complex could have on the efficiency of a war effort.

OOOPS! The first 3 launches in the intro are actually NLAWs, not Javelins! Javelins have a big black foam piece at the rear. Saab's NLAW has a similar shaped piece _at the front_ of the launcher.

It can be argued the US would've used far fewer Javelins in the first place. Ukraine has burned through a lot of Javelins because their infantry have had to use it extensively against tanks and IFVs because they were initially dominated in the field. A massive war machine like the US fighting Russia or China (let's assume it's "only" a conventional war for this scenario) would've used its air force, carrier aircraft if they're within range, attack helicopters, ground-attack missiles, then its rocket artillery, field artillery, tanks, IFVs, and so on even before its infantry got to use their Javelins against any remaining enemy armor.

I find it interesting that they always quote defense budgets of nations, but rarely take into account the difference of costs per nation. Example US vs China where costs of inputs (materials, wages, etc) are very different. I would like to see this done with these factors taken into account to give a true analysis.

Ok, this was a good video overall, but I gotta be a stickler about it. They keep talking about Javs but they put up images and videos of both Javelin missile launchers and NLAW launchers. They are VERY MUCH not the same, even as they are rather similar.

I say it's a good thing. Being able to test and refine your supply chain in peacetime is still better than spotting the cracks after declaring a wartime economy.

Anyone who's been in business the last 20 years sees exactly why we're having supply chain issues. While DoD requirements differ obviously unregulated consumer manufacturing has almost completely gone overseas in the past 25 years. We've seen US manufacturing in past conflicts make incredible changes turning things 180 degrees like switching car production to tanks and typewriter factories to rifles for example. There's a small fraction of production capability that we once had for low tech weaponry, let alone anything high tech. I also thought it unwise that US govt in previous administrators went after firearm manufacturers- the same ones that produced the arsenal that won WWI and WWII. When we need them, it's of the upmost importance, but as we've seen when we don't they can be discarded quite easily.

In my opinion it’s a good thing that we’re seeing this stuff now. Imagine if we got into a sudden conflict and our industry was this unprepared.

So, all us military logisticians knew 'just in time' logistics had no redundancy or robustness. First major war and it comes tumbling down. To give the US and Europe credit, they were not expecting to fight or support a prolonged conventional war. But it shows that local industry is critical to any country's national security.

Mass production is key to victory in any war, with probability of minor conflicts increasing in near future small arms production will be a key part of settling issues.

Would it have been "fiscally responsible," to produce at this scale before the war? We barely have workers for most businesses, nevermind supply chains. Stopping good people from coming here to get an education, and WORK is a national security issue. I never hear the WSJ worrying about that.

I've thought the same thing about the consolidation of America's defense contractors. Though not a "military expert", I am an accountant with considerable supply chain experience. And "just in time" supply chain manufacturing is not necessarily a good thing for defense contractors like it is in the auto industry.

One thing WSJ fails to take into account is that the U.S didn’t need to produce a lot of equipment that Ukraine needs, because conventional conflicts in the Middle East were over quickly. So troops didn’t really need things like Javelins or Artillery, because they wouldn’t be useful against the types of enemies they were fighting. Combined with American logistics and maintenance being relatively good, few troops were losing equipment.

Are those regulators who approved the merger now working for the companies with nice salaries?

That consolidation started around when Bush Senior was in Office. I remember that. They were commiserating the fact consolidation was the tall order, and a lot of M&A deals took place then. Martin Marietta became Lockheed Martin or something like that. By the time Reagan was in office, 9 out of 10 well paying Engineering jobs came from Defense. No security clearance, no job. I was then a Green Card Holder, and going through College. The glossy hiring book for companies doing DoD contracting work might've been 200 pages thick. Come to think of, all of the money made then wouldn't be worth . I remember interviewing for a job for a manufacturer of shrapnel projectiles in Concord MA, and the shop foreman was describing what the product did. I put some effort in keeping a straight face, but something might've surface the foreman could read on me. I am at peace not getting those well paying jobs. | sleep like a baby.

Just in time delivery is a problem in all sectors.

We definitely don’t spend enough on DoD contracts😅

I honestly learned about Javelin ATGM from Call of Duty 4 during the mission "The Bog", ah yesss great times and top 3 best Call of Duty

wsj frames this as a lagging supply chain story, rather than a story about ramping up supply chains for the protracted proxy wars with china to come

I mean we arent relying on javelins to take out tanks, just the ability to if necessary. Every next war will entirely rely on air superiority and SEAD missions

This is eye opening!

What are you analysing in the background at 4:37?

The fewer manufacturers equals higher prices. When you have no other choices you pay what ever price they give you.

One day it's too much defence industry now it's not enough

Great insight 👍 * why the "Analysing in background" banner at little over half way through the video?

Great video!

Quality reporting

This is really all very good news. It’s so much better to get this fixed now then during wartime for us.

Excellent stuff.

What's the "analyzing in background" flashing on screen at 4:38 ?

I think the main problem is consolidation and monopolies

4:38 so do you guys Screen record the video an upload it besides actually rendering and exporting to save time?

Well that's moderately terrifying.

I thought the point of a defense department was to maintain a force that can take on any adversary?

Informative, though an editing mistake appears at 4:39: 'Analyzing in background'

If you're also wondering what that was at 4:38, it says "Analyzing in background". Wonder what that is.

Get on it Congress! Solve this!

This is what is sometimes called "a cheap lesson". The benefit to the US is that we aren't in a direct hot war with a near peer adversary. We now have some time to fix the problem.

Good report, interesting to remember the old work place and program

I like how the javelina and the warthog are both tank destroyers

The more complex a weapon system is the harder it is to raise production because to build new and complex production lines and then train up new operators takes both time and money

Suppliers not only have a citizen's duty to resist radical exaggerations of the need to arm both the government and potentially other governments but a moral duty to act as a brake on drastic expansions of various components of military industrial production as it relates to unjustifiable expansion of the military capacity of the state in spite of real-world conditions. The state should not be underwritten by the strength of military industrial production and to account the industry should not become accomplice to radical schemes by various governments or entities within them from time to time to attempt to stimulate affairs or even the economy with military industrial production. That would be irascible and fundamentally irresponsible.

4:38 weird glitch says "analyzing in background"

wall street journal what is with flashing, scanning background screen 4:37-4:38min

Anyone surprised by WSJ showing NLAW launches while talking about the Javelin?

There is a lot to consider here. I understand Warren's position but a heightened base of specific manufacture increases security risk. But a heightened base of manufacture also increases opportunity for innovation. These are opposed. I wonder if in designing advanced weaponry the ability to quickly increase production is considered at all and if making manufacture scalable shouldn't be part of the criteria. Maybe it's that simple.

Good.

That was pretty alarming

Regardless of cracks in the system, you have to admit post 9/11, the forever wars are the gift that keeps on giving if you're the defence industry.

Another issue the video did not bring up is that unlike regular business that can sell good to any counties or business as long as it is allowed, we don't want that to happen for milliary supply company. I mean jut think if Russia or China or Iran is able to buy the f35 or some high tech weapons from US military company. It will be very bad. I think that's one of the reason why military contact is very expensive not only to cover for R&D but also have an exclusive Claus that you can't sell to certainly companies or counties but to keep your company a float and keep making these military equipment we will pay you more.

"THISSSSS" 0:02

Time 4:38 in the video analysis background in orange flashes 🤔

lets hope china doesn't see this video...

What the video doesn't mention or cover is that it's likely every country around the world is facing similar issues. The United States was not unique in its C-19 supply issue struggles, nor are we the only country facing economic woes currently. The only question is how quickly we can adapt and overcome. Given the potential financial incentives... I'd say we'll be alright ;)

that's dangerous.

I'd rather learn this now than latter. Good time to address it now.

Better now than later when they are directly involved in a war.

Perhaps defense contracts should always include building redundant machinery, tools, and other equipment for production lines AND warehousing components, hardware, and all materials necessary for the type of quick a sudden large war might require in case the U.S. suddenly needs more (?).

4:38 - Analysing in background?

At 4:38 you can see the adobe premier pro “analyzing background” banner

It would be interesting if the US govt banned further mergers or purchases of smaller companies. Instead, larger companies could invest up to 49% in smaller companies. This would either see more investment in smaller manufacturers (and thereby support innovation) or the larger companies would spend the money on R&D to try and compete with the innovation of smaller companies.

Why not take advantage of industrial capacity of friendly countries of US like South Korea, Japan and Germany. They will be happily obliged to supply components for Javelin or other high-tech munitions. They are already producing similar weapon systems and have industrial skill and infrastructure to supply. Having extra qualified supplier will encourage more competition and more extra production capacity on demand or emergency. South Korean arms industry have good capacity, quality and price for many legacy and modern weapons.

4:38 , "Analyzing in background"..huh?

4:36 That blip says "Analyzing In Background"... You're welcome

Break up the monopolies.

Russian tanks face German tanks in combat once again. Germany is renowned for its high quality manufacturing, yet has extreme difficulty comprehending a simple concept-assuming that it is even able to learn at all-and is making the same mistake all over again. Superior equipment, first class training, unparalleled discipline. What could possibly go wrong? This time? Perhaps, one of us ought to let them know.

4:37 "Analyzing in background"?

4:37 analyzing in background?

In France we got the same pattern of consolidation and we lost many companies and supply chains. Lot of people say it is no problèm because the US can be the backup. Well the US has the same issue.

Every supplier of weapons must have their assembly lines and trainer stuff preserved until the particular weapon remains in service of an army in order to ensure steady supply when army stocks begin to shrink.

It's good that we are aware of this issue. Now let's get to fix it!

I'm Ukrainian from Donetsk. I'm grateful to the American people and the American government for helping Ukraine. The Javelin is an excellent weapon, it helps us a lot in the fight against Russian fascists. God bless America!

That subliminal flash at 4:38 says “Analyzing in background.”

Alternate title for this video: how we can feed more money to the war machine

I’m so surprised that the Wall Street Journal telling the truth now even though it’s too late to tell to the public. 😂😂😂😂

Someone forgot to remove that 4:38

I like how they totally evaded the word "MONOPOLY"

The javelin, the best!! MANPAT

These guys have n.ever worked a day in DOD contracting and production. I designed the first Javelin launch motor tooling in the early 1990s, developed MK1000 bomb production, M1 Abrams gun ammo, etc. The problem isn't "competition" or pricing. They're correct in that certain types of munitions like Javelin are very expensive and equipment wasn't designed for a protracted WWII style war. On the other hand, tank munitions were high capability The overall problem is having trained personnel, using available munitions with launchers and delivered in a timely manner. It's a very complicated logistics problem. The U.S. has more than enough capability to deliver JDAM, but the delivery vehicle will be in short supply without appropriate delivery of the launch vehicle.

@4:38 someone didn't analyze their whole video

Where are there now?

We need to decide whether the defense industry is for the American people, or for shareholders of the defense industry

So government turned the defense industry into a monopoly? And you can't just ramp up production? Read that between the lines.. What that means is they only want a few friends making all the money and we're not allowing any competition to cut in on that, even if the nation's safety is at stake... Gotcha... Put another contract out or offer $1 more a unit and watch how fast production ramps up. Edit: Guess I should have finished the video first before I watched it LOL But yeah, corporations, that's the reason for most of our problems and why they spend so much on media to convince us government is the problem. Government isn't that powerful, the multibillionaire's who pay off these slime ball politicians are what's powerful. Gas too expensive? Blame government while oil companies are making record profits! Malnourished infant due to a formula shortage? Blame government for it while a few companies that control supply make record profits off it's scarcity.. While certain area codes never knew the problem existed..

Well, at least we're learning from it now instead of later. Let's see if anyone does something about it.

4:38 The editors forgot this part for 1 frame or so

That’s why this is a good opportunity to really tune up the military supply chain, use up some equipment that has been stored for a while and test how well the current weapons work in a real combat situation.

"this is the javaline" they say while showing footage the the British/Swedish NLAW 😆

The Military Industrial Complex is 5 companies, wow.

the large explosive warhead and accurate targeting system is what makes this very potent .... hand fired

This is extremely alarming. Is anyone actually constructively DOING something about this or is everyone still standing around clutching their pearls and wringing their hands?

4:38 "Analysing in background" 😶

finally some good news

But for example when Texas Instuments sold off their defense industry to Raytheon the facilities & manpower remained intact. So not sure the loss of scale translates - seems more of a supply chain/covid issue