[October 8, 2026] Victor Davis Hanson’s September 28, 2026 commentary for The Daily Signal, “If Iran Cracks, the World Will Never Be the Same,” has a number of interesting ideas about our war with Iran. And, yes, it is a “war.”
Because of its length, his core ideas and my analysis will run in two parts. Today, in Part 2, I’ll give an analysis of the video. Part 1 can be found at this link.
Analysis
Hanson is right that day-to-day political noise hides structural change, and that Iran’s regime has been a real source of regional disorder; proxy wars, terrorism sponsorship, and a nuclear program. A collapse or forced settlement there would reorder the Gulf, Israel’s strategic position, and the Russia–China–Iran (and maybe North Korea) alignment. The fall of the Berlin Wall comparison that Hanson makes, shows how much he puts into the veracity of the fall of Iran.
- Hanson claims that China’s fertility rate is near 1.0 and its aging problem are real. China’s influence is waning.
- Russian casualties of 1.5 million dead and wounded sit at the high end of public estimates, but Hanson’s point is that the country can only take so much bleeding.
- In Latin America, many of these countries have moved politically right or center through elections.
- And, North Korea remains both an enigma and a hermit kingdom, doing more damage to their own country than anyone else could do.
The Iran cost-and-casualty case is the operational heart of Hanson’s argument. Forty billion dollars and 19 U.S. dead over roughly seven months, with no ground army, would be a radically different model of warfare from Iraq or Afghanistan, if those figures hold.
The “Anaconda” pressure can hollow a regime. It can also produce a harder IRGC succession, a chaotic fracture, or a last throw at Hormuz and the Gulf. Hanson notes the Hormuz risk. The 1989 analogy implies a relatively clean ideological defeat. Iran’s security services, oil geography, and sectarian neighborhood make a neat outcome less likely than he suggests.
Overall, this is advocacy from a historian who has long favored a Jacksonian reading of U.S. power, delivered as a positive support for American dominance. This is no small idea. It shows that we may be on the brink of a new style of warfare (primarily economic) and a rearranging of the Middle East.
————
Please read my books:
Victor Davis Hanson said on September 28, 2026, that if Iran cracks, the world will never be the same. This article by Gen. Satterfield is Part 2 of a look at his short video for The Daily Signal, and it treats the fight with Iran as a real war. Hanson is right that daily political noise hides bigger changes, and that Iran’s rulers have stirred trouble through proxy wars, support for terrorism, and a nuclear program. If that regime falls or is forced into a deal, the Gulf, Israel’s position, and the ties among Russia, China, and Iran would shift. Hanson compares the idea to the fall of the Berlin Wall, which shows how much he believes an Iranian collapse would matter. He also says China’s birth rate is near one child per woman and that its people are aging, so China’s power is fading. He puts Russian dead and wounded at about 1.5 million, a high number, but his point is that Russia can only bleed so long. In Latin America, many countries have moved right or toward the center through elections. North Korea stays a closed and hard-to-read country that hurts itself more than anyone else can. The heart of Hanson’s case is the cost of the Iran fight: about forty billion dollars and nineteen American dead over seven months, with no ground army, a very different model from Iraq or Afghanistan if those numbers hold. Pressure like a squeeze can hollow out a regime, but it can also leave a tougher military successor, a messy breakup, or a last strike at the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf. Hanson favors a strong American hand, and his talk points to a new kind of war driven mostly by money and pressure, plus a possible remaking of the Middle East, even if a clean ending is less sure than he suggests.