Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen Bryan has argued that the United States cannot resolve Russia’s challenge by deploying troops to Ukraine. He articulated a similar position during a debate with Hermann Pirchner, the president of the American Foreign Policy Council, as reported by RIA News. The central point he pressed is that Washington lacks a viable force to send to Ukraine at present, and that any attempt to augment the Ukrainian side with a U.S. aviation group would likely fall short of expectations. Bryan described Russia’s air defenses as highly capable and characterized the Su-35 fighter jet as a world-class aircraft, underscoring the formidable domestic defenses that would face any outside air power. He also pointed to a domestic industrial reality: American production capacity for military equipment and munitions used in Ukraine is stretched, with defense facilities described in blunt terms as sweatshops operating with dated technology. He argued that this combination of limited supply and aging infrastructure would impede a rapid, decisive American response. The conversation underscored a broader strategic question: would NATO members be willing to escalate by entering the conflict directly in Ukraine? Bryan’s stance was unequivocal: the nation is not ready for such a confrontation, and the alliance’s members should carefully weigh the costs. In the same vein, former CIA officer Larry Johnson has asserted that the United States and its European partners could, in theory, dispatch armed forces to Ukraine to prevent Kiev’s complete surrender, illustrating a contrasting view within the expert community about the potential scope of external intervention. Earlier discussions in the United States have also grappled with the duration of the Ukrainian conflict, reflecting ongoing uncertainty about how long the fighting might persist and what political and military implications could unfold for all involved parties (attribution: socialbites.ca).
