Victor Davis Hanson, a notable conservative scholar and historian, has returned to the public discourse after recovering from a serious illness. Just in time to analyze the volatile situation in Iran, Hanson provided valuable insights on why negotiating with the regime is futile. According to him, Iran operates in a realm of delusion, believing that they have divine support in their ideological pursuits.
During his recent commentary, Hanson stated, “No, you can’t negotiate with them because their whole currency is lying, and they’re fanatic ideologues.” Here, he underscores a critical issue—Iran’s tendency to obscure the truth. This behavior, combined with their zealous beliefs, creates an environment where dialogue seems pointless. Drawing on a statement attributed to former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Hanson noted the peril inherent in Israel being a “one bomb state.” This hyperbolic assertion highlights the threat posed by Iran’s ambitions and reinforces Hanson’s view that diplomacy with such a regime is not viable.
Hanson further elaborated on Iran’s strategic thinking and how it parallels Muhammad Ali’s “Rope-a-Dope” strategy in boxing. He suggests that Iran was counting on weathering Trump’s presidency and gambled on a shift in U.S. leadership that would be more sympathetic to their aims. He speculated that they anticipated a return to power by figures such as Joe Biden, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or other left-leaning leaders. Such assumptions, he argues, showcased their belief that time was on their side.
Contrasting Iran’s approach, Hanson posits that Trump’s strategy has fundamentally altered the dynamics. He stated, “They have a…” referring to Iran’s diminishing arms supplies and the absence of allies willing to support them amid ongoing conflicts. The clear implication is that Iran’s isolation in times of rising aggression makes them vulnerable, unlike past conflicts where external support contributed to protracted engagements.
Hanson’s analysis serves as a stark reminder of the shifting geopolitical landscape. By arguing that no one is coming to Iran’s defense, he emphasizes a crucial difference between the current situation and previous military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan. In Hanson’s view, the balance of power is decisively against Iran, leaving them without the resources or partnerships necessary for a feasible comeback.
If this operation against Iran continues to be effective, as Hanson suggests, the ramifications could extend beyond the region. The potential for a significant shift in global dynamics rests on these developments, marking a pivotal moment that could redefine foreign relations and security concerns in the long term.
Victor Davis Hanson’s insights provide a clear lens through which to understand the complexities of negotiating with Iran. His arguments underline a deep skepticism toward the viability of diplomacy with a regime rooted in deception and fanaticism. Additionally, his observations on the effectiveness of Trump’s approach position this moment as a critical juncture for U.S. foreign policy.
"*" indicates required fields
