Replacing the military equipment transferred to Ukraine by the United States’ NATO allies could lead to roughly $21.7 billion in foreign military sales (FMS) or direct commercial sales for American industry. At the same time, backfilling the weapons these allies have sent to Ukraine with U.S. equipment could improve their capabilities and build a more effective military deterrent while lowering the Pentagon’s cost to procure these weapons. It would also enhance the quality of the weapons U.S. warfighters wield and strengthen U.S. defense industrial base capacity.

‍FDD’s Center on Military and Political Power (CMPP) has developed a comprehensive database of U.S. systems, and their respective FMS sale estimates, that could replace the military equipment transferred to Ukraine by the United States’ NATO allies. CMPP relied on open-source information from the military analysis site Oryx to establish a baseline regarding the types and quantities of arms non-U.S. NATO countries have committed to Ukraine, and used data from Defense Security Cooperation Agency announcements of FMS sales to estimate the unit price of the respective replacement American system. The database is available below, as are assumptions and notes related to this research project.

For a copy of the full database and media inquiries, please contact press@fdd.org. For more information, see this article published in Defense News.

* Rows noted with an asterisk are situations where a NATO member donated equipment, but it is highly unlikely that they will order a U.S.-produced system to replace the equipment. These rows were not included in calculating the $21.7 billion total.

Assumption 1: NATO members will replace each unit of transferred equipment with a comparable unit of U.S.-produced equipment
‍Assumption 2: Those replacements will take the form of modern U.S. systems through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program or through Direct Commercial Sales (DCS)

‍Note 1: In some cases, it was not possible to identify a U.S.-produced equivalent system
‍Note 2: Costs were generally estimated by finding the unit cost from previous FMS sales listed by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency; some inaccuracy will result from inflation, economies of scale, rounding, changes in cost after approval date, or differing amounts of peripheral equipment included in the sale
‍Note 3: Costs are rounded to the nearest $1,000
‍Note 4: If the quantity of systems donated was unknown, (1) was entered in the "adjusted quantity" column
‍Note 5: Systems donated directly by the United States are not included in this dataset, as they would not be replaced through FMS/DCS programs