Today, Victor Davis Hanson analyzes how the war in Iran has gone so far, and lays out the two major paths the Trump administration could choose from here; Barry Strauss lists ten lessons he’s taken away from the war, as well as a few concerns the conflict has raised regarding America’s capacity for serious strategic commitments; and H.R. McMaster speaks with Finnish ambassador to Germany Kai Sauer about Finland’s role on the front lines of NATO collective defense.
War in Iran
“In terms of size, population, resources, wealth, and military strength, Iran has been the most formidable adversary the United States has faced in the Middle East,” Senior Fellow Victor Davis Hanson writes at his Blade of Perseus site. “Yet our losses in this war so far have been historically low, while the damage to the Iranian industrial, nuclear, and military infrastructure has been immense and unprecedented.” Despite these tactical and even strategic military triumphs, Hanson notes that the US “has yet to secure the peace.” The military historian sees two paths forward: some sort of deal, with the risk that the ruling regime claims victory by remaining in power; or an ultimatum backed by the credible military plan “to inflict enough damage on the Iranian theocracy and its appendages to end the current off-and-on war.” Hanson suggests that either course could leave the country “ripe for internal uprising.” Read more here.
For the latest issue of Strategika, Senior Fellow Barry Strauss offers “ten strategic and political lessons” of the Iran war so far. “The allied attacks by the United States and Israel did very great damage to Iranian political, military, and military-industrial power, but they did not deliver a knockout blow,” the distinguished military historian writes. Strauss notes that revolutionary regimes like Iran’s often can take significant damage yet “still refuse to surrender.” He also points out that a suboptimal public communications effort from the Trump administration, combined with foreign influence operations and existing ideological opposition to Middle East wars, have contributed to weak public support for the Iran campaign. This leaves the US with a serious challenge to confront as the specter of war with China looms. “Wealth makes people soft, as the ancient moralists noted long ago. Unfortunately, dictatorial regimes are hard, and they have us in their crosshairs.” Read more here.
Allied Security and Defense
On the latest episode of Today’s Battlegrounds, Kai Sauer, ambassador of Finland to Germany, speaks with Senior Fellow H.R. McMaster about Finland's defense and economic priorities, its role in NATO, Russia’s persistent threat to European security, and how US-Finland cooperation enhances both nations’ security and prosperity. Sauer and McMaster reflect on the importance of transatlantic cooperation amid growing geopolitical competition, examining the strategic significance of Arctic security and the lessons other nations can draw from Finland’s defense preparedness in the face of Russian aggression. The conversation also explores the future of NATO burden-sharing, the challenge of countering authoritarian influence in the Global South, the economic and strategic measures needed to impose costs on the Kremlin, and Finland’s role in advancing innovation in AI and emerging technologies. Read more here.
US National Security
The “strategic competition” era has begun—replacing the bipolar national security structure built in response to the Cold War. Today’s transformed geopolitical landscape calls for new institutional frameworks, argue John Deutch and David Fedor in a Hoover policy analysis, excerpted here at Defining Ideas. How will proliferation and arms-control matters be negotiated in a tripolar nuclear world? Where does NATO go in a post-Soviet security landscape, and will the United States continue to be the alliance’s guarantor? Among the most important points of this transition are the future expansion of the US military budget, where the Pentagon will find and nurture innovation, and how the National Security Council should update the way it operates, Deutch and Fedor write. Read more here.
USA@250
Distinguished Research Fellow Michael Auslin continues his speaking tour following the publication of his new book National Treasure: How the Declaration of Independence Made America. Auslin sat down with Jim Byron, president and CEO of the Richard Nixon Foundation, who recently returned from fourteen months managing the National Archives in Washington, DC. Auslin shared that his research for the book made him more aware of how often US presidents have referred back to the Declaration across the nation’s history. “To me, it showed how the document remained living, through the great trials we were going through, bringing freedom to much of the world and defeating fascism, but also, living up ultimately to Jefferson’s promise and Lincoln’s commitment that this would be a land where all are equal.” Watch here.
Immigration Policy
This new video from the J-P Conte Initiative on Immigration examines the impact of emigrant inventors on the innovation ecosystems within both their destination country and the country from which they moved. Does one of these countries tend to benefit more from inventor migration? Economist Marta Prato explains that inventors who come to the United States become more productive—and remarkably, so do their former co-inventors back home, through ongoing knowledge-sharing. These migrant inventors, who now account for one in five US patents, create a two-way flow of ideas that strengthens the American economy while benefiting their countries of origin. Watch here.
Related Commentary