U.S. Vice President JD Vance, in the spring and summer of 2026, reached out directly to American military commanders in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, bypassing official Pentagon channels, to obtain their independent assessment of the war with Iran. According to The New York Times, as cited by RBC-Ukraine, what he heard during these conversations raised even greater concern in the second-highest-ranking official in the country than the official statements from the White House.
The Vice President's Personal Calls
From the very start of the conflict, Vance had opposed the war, and President Donald Trump tasked him with helping to bring the conflict to a close. That is why, according to sources, the vice president wanted to learn the individual views of the commanders before they were consolidated into a single Pentagon position. During the conversations, the objectives and tactics of the operation were discussed, along with an assessment of losses, the actions of Iranian forces in the Strait of Hormuz, the extent of their adaptation, and what kind of strikes the Iranian government could withstand. Separately, Vance requested detailed reports on the state of stockpiles and on how the transfer of weapons to the Middle East affects the United States' ability to deter China, Russia, and North Korea.
Depleted Arsenal: What the Commanders Reported
The commanders, according to sources, reported that the war is depleting critical weapons stockpiles, first and foremost Patriot interceptor missiles. By the end of spring, on one of the theaters of operations, it is claimed, fewer than 100 such units remained. The stockpiles of Army tactical missile systems with a range of about 190 miles and of the precision-strike missiles that were meant to replace them were also hit. In the military's assessment, stocks of key munitions have fallen to the lowest level in history.
Strategic Concerns and Trump's Reaction
After a series of conversations, Vance, according to sources, developed deep concerns about the overall strategy and the prospects for the operation's success. The commanders' assessments clearly showed the "incredible suffering" the Iranian government was prepared to endure in the struggle for survival. Vance took these conclusions into account in private conversations with Trump and his closest circle. The president himself, according to the same data, was receiving increasing information on briefings from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine about the strained state of stockpiles and the resilience of the Iranian military, which he initially found hard to believe. In private conversations, Trump sharply criticized the media that had detailed the reduction in stockpiles, calling the journalists "traitors." Following such publications, it is reported, government investigators subjected dozens of senior Pentagon officers to polygraph tests, and a number of officials feared that this sent a signal of U.S. weakness to China and Russia.
Contradictory Data
Here the versions of the sides and sources diverge noticeably. On the one hand, Donald Trump recently stated that the war with Iran could end as early as November, immediately after the U.S. midterm elections, and that gasoline prices in the country would then drop sharply. On the other hand, according to WSJ, senior White House officials discussed with the president a scenario in which the conflict could last until the end of his presidential term, since Iran is capable of continuing to resist despite U.S. pressure. Thus, the White House's public forecast of a swift end to the war and the closed assessments of its own administration about the protracted nature of the conflict do not match in terms of timing. A separate inconsistency concerns the tone: official Washington statements emphasize the manageability of the operation, whereas, according to NYT reports, the military's private assessments paint a picture of critical depletion of the arsenal.
Vance's Position on Key Issues
The vice president's public statements broadly align with his role as the "closer" of the conflict. According to available data, Vance stated that the main U.S. goal in the war with Iran is low oil and gas prices for Americans, and that Washington does not intend to send 150,000 troops to Iran. Moreover, in his words, Iran assured the United States that it does not intend to charge a fee for the passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz. These statements complete the picture in which the administration is trying to reconcile military pressure with the search for a way out of the conflict.
The totality of these reports points to a growing gap between the White House's public rhetoric and the military's closed assessments. For Kyiv and other allies, the key question remains: to what extent the depletion of American arsenals and the possible prolongation of the war with Iran can affect the United States' ability to maintain deterrence in other regions and the scale of aid to allies.
