Vice President JD Vance took the uncommon step over the spring and summer to contact U.S. military commanders stationed in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia directly, seeking candid assessments about the ongoing conflict with Iran. According to current and former officials, Vance aimed to gather unfiltered military perspectives before the information was consolidated into official Pentagon reports.

Vance, who initially opposed the war, was charged by President Donald Trump with helping to bring it to an end. His inquiries covered a broad range of issues, including war objectives, tactics, casualty estimates, Iranian capabilities in the Strait of Hormuz, and the resilience of Iran’s government. He also sought detailed information on U.S. military stockpiles and how the transfer of weapons to the Middle East was affecting the ability to deter other adversaries such as China, Russia, and North Korea.

Military commanders expressed particular concern over depleted inventories of critical munitions, especially Patriot interceptors, which are central to U.S. air defenses. By late spring, some theaters reportedly had fewer than 100 such interceptors remaining. Supplies of Army Tactical Missile Systems and Precision Strike Missiles—intended to replace older systems—were also at historic lows. These shortages have raised alarms within the military about the capacity to defend against Iranian retaliation or respond to threats in other regions.

Vance incorporated these assessments into private discussions with Trump and senior administration officials. Meanwhile, Trump received briefings from General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, about the strain on U.S. stockpiles and the endurance of Iranian forces. According to officials, some of these details were met with skepticism by the president, who publicly stated that the United States had already won the conflict and downplayed concerns about weapon shortages.

Despite private worries, the White House maintained a united front. Government spokespeople emphasized that senior leaders, including Trump, Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and General Caine, had access to continuous military advice and comprehensive information. They stressed coordination among military and civilian leaders in shaping national security policy.

The initiation of Vance’s direct communications with commanders came shortly after the war began on February 28. Prewar planning had been conducted in a tightly controlled circle at the Pentagon and Central Command, with many senior officials excluded for security reasons. Early in the war, Vance sought more detailed and nuanced briefings to inform his counsel to the president, at a time when the conflict exceeded the initial expectations of concluding swiftly. Trump had privately anticipated a rapid collapse of the Iranian government, influenced by recent U.S. and Israeli military actions.

As the fighting dragged beyond the planned six-week window, the administration authorized negotiations aimed at ending the war, although these talks concluded in August without an agreement. Vance played a prominent public role in these diplomatic efforts. Officials familiar with his discussions could not confirm whether his findings directly influenced the president’s turn toward diplomacy.

Vance’s active involvement in national security matters marks a significant role for a vice president with limited prior experience. He sought assessments from commanders overseeing theaters outside the immediate conflict zone, including Admiral Samuel J. Paparo Jr. of U.S. Pacific Command, due to concerns about potential impacts on U.S. capabilities in regions critical to countering China’s expanding influence.

Vance is known within the administration for meticulous attention to operational detail, regularly interfacing with intelligence analysts and demanding granular updates. To accommodate his information needs, the Office of Naval Intelligence produces daily reports on maritime activity in the Strait of Hormuz, provided to both Vance and other senior aides. General Caine similarly supplies Vance with detailed previews and summaries of American military strikes.

While Vance’s outreach broadened the flow of information, officials noted that, for most senior leaders, comprehensive data about the ongoing war remained limited and difficult to obtain. The situation has also raised concerns among officials about signaling vulnerability to other global powers closely monitoring U.S. military resources.

The administration’s accounts illustrate a complex dynamic between the public narrative of progress and internal assessments highlighting challenges, illustrating the difficulties faced in managing a costly and inconclusive conflict with Iran.