On this episode of Hunter's War, guest Bardia Hariri, an Iranian-American academic and businessman, lays out a vision for Iran's future. With a deepening rift between the Iranian state and its people and the recent mass atrocity in which an estimated 33,000 citizens were killed, Hariri outlines the vision of Iranaissance. A decentralized platform of experts and diaspora, including CEOs and engineers, who are preparing for the eventual collapse of the regime. Central to this vision is a focus on economic reintegration over political sloganeering. Hariri identifies five non-negotiables that Iran must meet to attract the $150 billion in annual investment required for national redevelopment.

Finally, the episode explores Iran’s potential as a linchpin in the Global Value Chain (GVC). With over 50 million citizens under age 40 and immense energy reserves, a transparent and neutral Iran could transform from a regional destabilizer into a strategic trade crossroad connecting Europe and Asia. Hariri emphasizes that the success of this transition depends on empowering those within the country to ensure stability in the critical first 60 days following a regime collapse.

To learn more about the work Iranaissance, check out their website www.iranaissance.org

Is the West past the tipping point for civil conflict? In this episode of Hunter’s War, we sit down with Professor David Betz of King's College London for a challenging conversation about political legitimacy, insurgency, and the fragility of modern Western societies.

We explore the core concepts of insurgency as a social movement and why modern counterinsurgency often fails. Applying these lessons home, we discuss the indicators of domestic civil war currently flashing red in the West: polar factionalism, the fear of status loss, and the total collapse of institutional legitimacy. We also examine why economic wealth and elite overproduction contribute to the expectation gap and what strategies might exist to mitigate the fallout of internal conflict.

Referenced essays by Professor Betz:

Civil War Comes to the West: https://www.militarystrategymagazine.com/article/civil-war-comes-to-the-west/

Civil War Comes to the West Part II: https://www.militarystrategymagazine.com/article/civil-war-comes-to-the-west-part-ii-strategic-realities/

Professor David Betz is a Professor of War in the Modern World at King's College London, where he has taught in the Department of War Studies for over 20 years. His research focuses on insurgency, counterinsurgency, and the changing character of war.

Subscribe and follow Hunter’s War for more discussions on the intersection of geopolitics, war, and society.

This week, I’m joined by Michelle Haas, a PhD researcher at the University of Ghent focusing on NATO and European defense policy. She is also a fellow at the Egmont Institute, a board member of the Royal Higher Institute for Defense, and an active reservist in the Special Forces.For Dutch speakers, I highly recommend her podcast, de Paniekzaaiers: https://open.spotify.com/show/133zoy8FpiOehF5WA47KLy?si=80af5952da0e4addThe episodes with Jan Balliauw on Russia and, before that, discussing the US potential withdrawal from Europe are great. In this episode, we discuss the precarious state of the transatlantic security relationship, the lessons Europe can learn from the Nordic and Baltic states about societal resilience, and the critical lack of strategic communication from political leaders about evolving threats.The Transatlantic AllianceOur conversation started with the transatlantic security relationship, the cornerstone of European defense for the last century. Michelle argues that while the alliance is not dead, it is under "immense pressure". She believes the possibility of a US withdrawal of troops from Europe is "very likely" and that Europe is simply not prepared for.A sudden, unpredictable withdrawal would be a "shock to Europe" and could cause a "serious break" in the relationship. This isn't a new development; the US has been signaling its pivot to Asia for 10-15. However, Europe's strategic disunity, stemming from different threat perceptions among member states, has prevented it from developing genuine strategic autonomy.Lessons from the Nordics & BalticsWe then turned to the Nordic and Baltic countries to learn lessons from their defense approaches. Michelle notes that these countries have greater "strategic clarity" regarding the Russian threat. For them, the war didn't begin in 2022 but in 2014, and there is a sense of frustration with Western Europe's delayed reaction. Key aspects of their approach include:Total Defense: They embrace a "whole of society" approach, understanding that defense is more than just a military matter and that the entire population must be included and prepared. Finland is a prime example, with hundreds of thousands of reservists and an extensive civil defense infrastructure.Societal Resilience: The goal is to build a society that can withstand disruption. This includes practical measures like ensuring the population can take care of itself for at least 72 hours in a crisis, a standard that should apply across Europe.Deterrence by Punishment: Estonia, for example, is investing in long-range missiles to demonstrate an ability to strike back at Russia, shifting from a strategy of deterrence by denial to deterrence by punishment.The Strategic Communication GapA major theme of our discussion was the failure of strategic communication. There is a "disconnect" between political leaders and the public, who often don't understand what threats they are preparing for or why massive defense investments are needed.Michelle argues that political messaging in Western Europe is often alarmist ("we are not prepared," "we have zero stocks"), which is counterproductive. The Nordic and Baltic approach is more constructive and empowering: "we are prepared and we are preparing and everyone can take a part in this". She points to recent examples of Belgian politicians calling increased defense spending a "social bloodbath" and creating "collective hysteria," which only serves to increase the polarization our adversaries want to achieve. The goal should be to balance realism with an optimistic story that gives people a sense of agency, rather than creating fear.Photo by Thomas Nolf.