Victor Davis Hanson: Trump Is Preparing for the Final Phase Against Iran
The United States is quietly preparing to alter the geopolitical architecture of the Middle East. After nearly 140 days of a grinding, low-intensity conflict that began with initial American airstrikes on February 28, the Biden-era paradigms of calculated restraint are being systematically dismantled. According to a sweeping assessment by military historian and strategic analyst Victor Davis Hanson, the Trump administration is positioning itself for a decisive, disproportionate military campaign designed to render Iran militarily and nuclear-inert before turning the keys of regional security over to an international coalition.
For the past 100 days, the waters of the Persian Gulf and the skies over the Levant have been defined by a predictable, if hazardous, rhythm of tit-for-tat exchanges. This strategic limbo, however, has reached its expiration date. The underlying reality of this conflict is shifting from a war of attrition into a high-stakes final phase—one designed to shatter Tehran’s asymmetric capabilities, seal its underground nuclear enrichment facilities, and allow Washington to declare victory well ahead of the crucial upcoming midterm elections.
The Failure of Proportionality
The current conflict began with a massive American opening salvo, yet the subsequent four months have failed to yield a definitive strategic outcome. Hanson observes that while the first 40 days of the campaign featured intensive bombing, the subsequent 100 days degenerated into a cycle of negotiations punctuated by sporadic, symmetric missile and drone exchanges.
This policy of symmetry has achieved very little of permanence. The diplomatic and military halfway measures have left the fundamental pillars of Iranian defiance intact:
Unchecked Proliferation: Missile barges continue to slip into the waters of the Gulf states, replenishing regional proxies.
Choked Chokepoints: Western forces have yet to secure absolute, unchallengeable control over the critical Strait of Hormuz.
The Nuclear Shadow: Most critically, the international community remains without verifiable control over Iran’s stockpiles of enriched uranium.
By adhering to a framework of measured retaliation, the United States inadvertently allowed Tehran to validate its preferred doctrine of asymmetric endurance. For the Iranians, a draw is functionally equivalent to a victory. Under the cover of ongoing negotiations, Iran has managed to ride out American strikes, betting that the clock would ultimately run out on Washington’s political willpower.
The Midterm Calculus and the Convergence of Strategies
To understand the sudden pivot toward an unmeasured military response, one must look directly at the domestic political calendars of both Washington and Tehran. Both capitals have spent the last four months playing a sophisticated game of political chess, with the upcoming U.S. midterm elections serving as the ultimate horizon.
┌────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ THE STRATEGIC MIDTERM CHESS │
└───────────────────┬────────────────────┘
│
┌────────────────────────┴────────────────────────┐
▼ ▼
┌─────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────┐
│ IRAN'S STRATEGY │ │ TRUMP'S STRATEGY │
├─────────────────────────┤ ├─────────────────────────┤
│ • Drag out the conflict │ │ • Prevent nuclear Iran │
│ • Symmetric engagement │ │ • Keep Hormuz open │
│ • Wait for midterms │ │ • Leverage strong econ │
│ • Hope for Dem Congress │ │ • Disproportionate blow │
└─────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────┘
For Iran, the strategic imperative has been delay. The regime’s leadership calculates that if they can prolong the conflict through the autumn, historical precedents will assert themselves, delivering control of the House of Representatives to the Democrats. Tehran believes a divided American government would quickly move to defund or restrict military operations, effectively forcing a stalemate and setting the stage for a more accommodating U.S. administration by 2028.
President Trump, conversely, operates under an entirely different set of domestic pressures. His primary objective is to protect his legislative agenda from being ossified by a hostile Congress. While historical reality dictate that 39 of the last 41 midterm elections have favored the out-party, the White House believes it possesses a unique window to defy political gravity.
The domestic backdrop is unexpectedly favorable for the administration:
Historically Low Inflation: Monthly inflation figures are hovering near historic nadirs.
Robust Employment: The national unemployment rate sits comfortably at 4.2 percent.
Economic Momentum: GDP growth is holding strong between 2.3 and 2.4 percent, buoyed by the delayed tailwinds of sweeping tax cuts, aggressive deregulation, and a dramatic surge in domestic energy production.
Coupled with favorable Supreme Court rulings on gerrymandering and recent redistricting, Trump senses a rare opportunity to secure a historic midterm upset. To capitalize on this economic strength, however, he must decisively close out the Iranian theater. The administration cannot afford an open-ended, simmering foreign entanglement to distract voters or disrupt global energy markets as Election Day approaches. The solution is a rapid, devastating escalation designed to force a conclusion.
The Doctrine of Asymmetric Devastation
The tactical shift observed over the last several days offers a blueprint for what Hanson terms the “final phase.” The period of measured, proportional responses is officially over. To break the back of the Iranian regime’s resistance, the United States is shifting toward a doctrine of unmeasured and intentionally disproportionate force.
The immediate objective is the comprehensive demolition of Iran’s conventional and unconventional military infrastructure. Recent operations have bypassed low-level proxy targets to strike directly at the core of Iran’s industrial war machine. The target list is expansive and unyielding:
The Logistics of Terror: Complete destruction of shipyard facilities, dockworks, and the “mosquito fleet” of fast-attack craft used to mine international shipping lanes.
Manufacturing Hubs: Precision strikes targeting the domestic industrial complexes responsible for assembling ballistic missiles and long-range drones.
Launch and Storage Fields: Systemic elimination of known drone airfields and localized fuel depots that supply Iran’s missile brigades.
Air Defense Suppression: A systematic clearing of the geographical corridor flanking the Strait of Hormuz, wiping out anti-aircraft batteries and radar installations to guarantee absolute Western air supremacy.
According to the strategic timeline, this intensive conventional bombardment will persist for roughly one to two weeks. If the regime in Tehran refuses to concede under the weight of this initial onslaught, the administration is prepared to initiate a second, deeper layer of dual-use targeting.
This secondary phase would see the deployment of deep-penetration B2 stealth bombers tasked with hitting fortified underground complexes, most notably the heavily defended installations at Pickax Mountain. The objective would be to permanently seal the subterranean facilities harboring Iran’s enriched uranium. Concurrently, American air power would systematically sever the regime’s domestic logistics, targeting key transportation bridges and critical nodes of the national power grid. The goal is not nation-building or regime change through ground invasion, but rather the total neutralization of Iran’s capacity to project power beyond its borders.
The Exit Strategy: Creating an ‘Inert’ Iran
The defining feature of this final phase is its exit strategy. Unlike the protracted, multi-decade American entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Trump administration’s blueprint for Iran is predicated on a rapid exit and a robust model of international burden-sharing.
Once the air campaign concludes, the United States intends to present its regional and global allies with a fundamentally altered landscape. The administration’s message will be clear: Iran has been rendered militarily and nuclearly inert. Its air force will be non-existent, its naval capabilities shattered, and its command structure paralyzed.
At that juncture, Washington expects its partners to step into the vacuum. The Gulf states alone possess over 600 frontline, technologically superior combat aircraft, alongside advanced missile defense systems. With Iran’s offensive spine broken, these nations are more than capable of handling localized defense.
Furthermore, the administration plans to outsource the long-term policing of maritime trade. Because the United States has achieved energy independence, it no longer relies inherently on the oil flowing through the Strait of Hormuz; the primary beneficiaries of that corridor are Europeans, Japanese, South Koreans, and Taiwanese consumers. Under American naval leadership—maintained via rotating carrier strike groups and localized frigate deployments—a multi-national maritime coalition will be expected to provide the vessels and the collective willpower to keep the shipping lanes open. By shifting the logistical and financial burden to the nations that actually consume Persian Gulf energy, Trump can pivot his focus back to domestic economic priorities.
The Israeli Wild Card and the Reality of Deterrence
Perhaps the most striking anomaly of the current conflict is the conspicuous silence from Iran’s primary geopolitical target. Throughout this 140-day ordeal, Tehran has routinely boasted of its strikes against fellow Muslim nations—launching missiles and drones toward Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, while utilizing Houthi proxies to strike deep into the Saudi heartland. Yet, remarkably, Iran has meticulously avoided launching a direct assault on Israel.
This restraint exposes the raw efficacy of absolute deterrence. Iran’s leadership understands that while the United States has operated under political constraints, Israel represents an entirely different calculation. Over the last four and a half months, the Israeli military has rested its frontline forces, restocked its advanced munitions, and refined its operational intelligence.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ THE ANATOMY OF ISRAELI DETERRENCE │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ • Comprehensive intelligence infiltration of the IRGC │
│ • Precise tracking of fourth, fifth, and sixth-tier leadership │
│ • Restocked munitions and fully optimized air defense networks │
│ • Explicit warnings of immediate, non-survival retaliation │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
The level of Israeli intelligence penetration within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the broader Iranian military establishment is profound. Israeli operatives know where the regime’s commanders live, where they work, and how they travel. Tehran has been explicitly warned that any strike on Israeli soil will trigger an immediate, decapitating response targeting the fourth, fifth, and sixth tiers of the regime’s leadership.
Faced with the prospect of fighting a two-front war against American stealth technology and an unencumbered, deeply entrenched Israeli military, the clerical regime has blinked. They have chosen to absorb domestic political embarrassment and lash out at their Arab neighbors rather than risk an existential confrontation with a state that possesses overwhelming retaliatory capability.
Conclusion: The Ultimate Warning
The final phase of the American campaign against Iran represents a calculated gamble to rewrite the rules of Middle Eastern diplomacy through the application of overwhelming, asymmetric power. If the administration’s timeline holds, the coming weeks will determine whether Tehran bends to the destruction of its conventional military architecture or faces the permanent burial of its nuclear ambitions beneath the rubble of Pickax Mountain.
Should the regime attempt to covertly reconstitute its nuclear program in the aftermath, the administration has already demonstrated its willingness to deploy the ultimate contingency. Pointing back to the devastating B2 bomber strikes of July 2025, Washington has proven that Iran’s aging air defense network is entirely anemic when confronted with advanced Western military technology. For Donald Trump, the path forward is clear: strike hard, neutralize the threat, secure the shipping lanes through international coalitions, and return home to defend the domestic economy. Whether Tehran chooses concession or catastrophe remains to be seen, but the window for negotiation has firmly closed.
