U.S. May Be Spending Nearly $900 Million Per Day in Conflict With Iran

Mar 20, 2026

Share this article:

U.S. May Be Spending Nearly $900 Million Per Day in Conflict With Iran

A U.S.-based think tank estimates Washington spent roughly $3.7 billion in the first four days of its campaign against Iran—equivalent to about $891 million per day.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said in a March 5 analysis that the United States spent approximately $3.7 billion during the first 100 hours of operations against Iran, a period typically considered the most intense phase of an air campaign.

Of that total, operational costs were estimated at around $196 million, with a significant portion already accounted for in the fiscal year 2026 defense budget. Ammunition replenishment made up the bulk of spending at roughly $3.1 billion, while equipment losses and infrastructure repairs were estimated at about $350 million—most of which has not yet been budgeted.

A U.S. fighter jet takes off from an aircraft carrier (Photo: U.S. Central Command)

Air operations accounted for a substantial share of overall costs. CSIS estimates that in the first 100 hours alone, the U.S. military spent about $125 million on aircraft sorties, with at least $30 million per day expected thereafter.

Roughly 200 U.S. military aircraft are currently engaged in operations across the Middle East, including F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II stealth fighters, F-15E Strike Eagle heavy strike aircraft, F-16 Fighting Falcon multirole fighters, and A-10 Thunderbolt II ground-attack planes.

The U.S. Navy has also deployed significant forces to the region, including two aircraft carriers, 14 destroyers, and three littoral combat ships. Operating the naval fleet cost approximately $64.5 million over the first four days, with daily costs estimated at $15 million thereafter.

The U.S. military is believed to have used more than 2,000 weapons in the first 100 hours of strikes against Iran. CSIS estimates an average of 1.3 munitions per target, suggesting total usage could reach up to 2,600 weapons. Replenishing these munitions alone could cost around $1.5 billion.

A U.S. warship launches cruise missiles toward Iran (Photo: U.S. Central Command)

Missile and drone interception has also proven costly. Tehran is estimated to have launched around 500 missiles and 2,000 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), with interception largely carried out by the Patriot missile system and THAAD systems. Replenishing interceptor stockpiles could cost an additional $1.7 billion, according to CSIS.

Confirmed U.S. equipment losses remain relatively limited. The most notable incident involved three F-15E Strike Eagle aircraft reportedly lost to friendly fire over Kuwait. With production of the F-15E halted in favor of the newer F-15EX variant, replacing the lost aircraft could cost approximately $309 million.

Some U.S. military facilities in Kuwait and Qatar were also damaged in Iranian strikes, with repair costs estimated at no less than $50 million.

CSIS analysts say costs may begin to stabilize after the initial high-intensity phase of the conflict, depending on whether the U.S. shifts to less expensive weapons and on the scale and effectiveness of Iran’s retaliation.

However, much of the spending has yet to be incorporated into the current defense budget, meaning the U.S. government will likely need additional funding. CSIS said the Pentagon may seek supplemental appropriations or budget adjustments from Congress to cover the costs.

The United States and Israel launched a coordinated air campaign against Iran on Feb. 28, reportedly killing several senior military and political figures, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. The strikes triggered a sharp retaliatory response from Tehran targeting Israeli territory and U.S. bases across the Middle East.

A U.S. F-15 Eagle fires during an incident over Kuwait on March 2 (Photo: The Times of Israel, X/AMK Mapping)

The conflict shows no signs of easing, with Washington urging Israel to continue the campaign “to the end,” while Tehran has vowed to stop only after delivering what it calls a “decisive blow” to the United States.

Comments (0)

Loading comments...

May You Like

Trump Signals Return of Russian Oil Sanctions After Iran Conflict

Mar 15, 2026•Hot

Iran Strikes World’s Largest LNG Facility in Qatar

Mar 21, 2026•Hot

“DRAG HIM ACROSS THE ASPHALT!” — Unearthed Video Puts Trump DHS Pick Under Fire

Mar 21, 2026•Hot

Who Was Behind the Assassination of Ali Larijani?

Power Vacuum Emerges After Iran’s Top Security Official Is Assassinated The assassination of Ali Larijani, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, in an Israeli strike has exposed a significant security lapse in Tehran, raising concerns that tensions in the Middle East could escalate further. Iran confirmed on March 17 that Larijani—one of the country’s central security coordinators—was killed in an attack in Tehran earlier that day. The strike inevitably draws comparisons to the 2020 killing of Qassem Soleimani, the powerful commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Soleimani’s death not only removed a prominent military leader but also risked weakening Iran’s operational capabilities, leaving a void no successor has fully filled. Larijani’s role carried similar weight. A deeply influential figure within Iran’s political system, his death creates not only a power vacuum but also new challenges for Tehran’s ability to coordinate policy across competing institutions. At 67, Larijani was one of the most seasoned and influential politicians in Iran for decades. His career began during the Iran-Iraq War, where he rose through the ranks of the IRGC to brigadier general. He later held several key positions, including Speaker of Parliament from 2008 to 2020 and previously Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. He played a pivotal role in bridging multiple centers of power—from civilian institutions to military and security bodies—while advocating a more confrontational stance toward the United States and Israel. He was also central to shaping IRGC military operations. Larijani’s influence stemmed from his ability to navigate rival factions within Iran’s elite, maintaining ties with the IRGC while preserving a degree of independence from hardline groups. This positioned him as a critical intermediary, helping sustain internal balance within the political system. As a former parliamentary speaker, nuclear negotiator, and member of a powerful clerical family, Larijani commanded respect across Iran’s clerical establishment, the IRGC, and the state apparatus. That made him particularly valuable during periods of crisis, when unity can be as crucial as ideology. In recent months, Larijani had also been involved in efforts to delay the transition of power tied to a potential new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei. Some analysts argue that postponing such a decision could give Iran greater strategic flexibility in a post-conflict environment while avoiding constraints on future options. Ali Larijani, along with his son Morteza and a close bodyguard, Gen. Vahid Fateminejad, were killed in a pre-dawn airstrike on March 17 (Photo: Iran Intl). Beyond domestic politics, Larijani wielded considerable influence over Iran’s international relationships, particularly with partners such as China and Russia, helping shape the country’s foreign policy for years. He also played a key role in advancing the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers, including the United States. In August 2025, he was reappointed as Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, marking a notable political comeback after a period of relative marginalization. Within Iran’s layered power structure, the council serves as a crucial link between the military and civilian leadership, while also shaping key security and strategic policies. For years, Larijani had been considered a high-priority target in U.S. and Israeli strategies aimed at weakening Iran’s leadership. For Israel, targeting Larijani signals a broader objective: dismantling Iran’s governing structure, not merely degrading its military capabilities—even as the United States appears more focused on the latter. Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed interest in identifying a potential intermediary or transitional leader in Iran, drawing comparisons to Venezuela’s interim leadership model under Delcy Rodríguez. However, Larijani’s assassination significantly reduces the likelihood that such a figure could emerge in the near term. Experts say the killing is not only a blow to Iran’s leadership but also a source of growing internal instability. With several influential figures sidelined or no longer active in politics, the loss of a consensus-builder like Larijani could complicate decision-making at the highest levels. The incident may also affect public sentiment, potentially undermining confidence in the government’s ability to ensure the security of senior leadership as the conflict continues to intensify.