The argument made by the West, including the US Secretary of Defense, was that Russian missile production would be significantly curtailed due to trade restrict

The argument made by the West, including the US Secretary of Defense, was that Russian missile production would be significantly curtailed due to trade restrictions on advanced technology like microchips. If they are using missiles produced in recent months then that argument seems debunked to me. What basis is there to assume that Russia lacks the ability to mass produce the less sophisticated components of these missiles? --- Edit (can't reply): > They've also apparently been canibalizing consumer devices Based on an anecdotal report from the leadership of their primary belligerent in this conflict. Why is that easier to believe than the idea that they can produce the (very much not advanced) chips required in these missiles? > Historical. Iskanders have been produced in the dozens-per-year quantities pre-war, Kalibr in the ~100 range. They're using that many cruise missiles in a single day's attacks now; that isn't be sustainable long-term for anyone. Why would peacetime production represent their maximum capacity? They inherited a Cold War military-industrial complex which was preparing for a large scale global conflict. > You should re-read the NYT article you cite; it openly states it's not debunking what you claim it debunks. The fact the article reports is that a missile used in November was produced no earlier than October. I'm not required to agree with their insinuated conclusion. I do agree that the status of Russia's missile inventory is unclear since logically different types of missiles will be allocated for different uses based on their cost and capabilities (such as the ability to penetrate modern air defense systems).