OAN Commentary by: Richard Pollock
Wednesday, April 1, 2026
In his postscript, British historian James Holland in his book Normandy ’44 made an interesting observation that during the fight for Europe. He wrote that the Allied soldiers were “mostly conscripts from democratic countries rather than from totalitarian militaristic states.”
This is exactly the terms of engagement American and Israeli forces face in the current war against the totalitarian state of Iran.
The American forces are made up of volunteers. In Israel, there is universal conscription. Both countries are democracies.
Iran, on the other hand, is a frightening totalitarian state. Its mullahs have imposed a strict Sharia law on its populace for over four decades and have instilled terror among all of its populace. In January, in cold blood they murdered 30,000 of its own citizens who were protesting on Iranian streets.
The evidence we have seen reveals that the rigid, authoritarian military and political leadership that survives in Iran is pretty much losing the war.
Of course, if you read the New York Times or watch mainstream news, this is not clear at all.
On the diplomatic front, it’s vividly clear Iran today is as politically isolated as ever since its founding through undemocratic means 47 years ago. The Gulf States and other Muslim countries such as Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey have been trying to convince the surviving Iranian leadership to come to the negotiating table.
And it appears that even China, long a total supporter of the mullahs and which imports large amounts of Iranian oil, now is working as a backchannel with the Trump administration on the war. Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar met with his Chinese counterpart his last Tuesday to discuss possible solutions to end the war.
Furthermore, the remaining Iranian military leadership has decided to turn against all the Gulf States and Turkey, hurling ballistic missiles and drones towards these Muslim states. Reportedly, more Iranian missiles and drones have been launched toward Muslim states than at Israel.
Many, of course, argue that Iran’s ability to kill more than 30,000 civilian protesters and that they are continuing to launch missiles shows that the Iranian mullahs and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, (IRGC) is a tough military force that can do as it pleases without regard to public opinion.
And in the politically divided United States elected Democrats, progressive activists and pro-Muslim population groups oppose the war.
This public outcry from the American republic suggests that democracies don’t wage war very well. Democracies are, well, places where citizens can speak out and even undermine wars.
The Vietnam War was a great example. Anti-war protesters – including me – helped to quicken and end to the war. Of course, many Americans supported the war.
And interestingly, when the war ended most protesters remained silent – and a few even celebrated – the North Vietnamese victory. Many could argue the antiwar movement was a Fifth Column, a vital movement that aided South Vietnam’s Vietcong and to their ultimate communist bosses in North Vietnam.
In fact, Steve Dobransky, writing in the Journal of Strategic Security argues that war and democracies don’t mix well. “Throughout most of history, democracy and war were equated with military defeat and destruction.”
Hal Brands, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute adds that most totalitarian governments during wartime expect democracies to be weak and relatively easy to defeat.
During World War II, for example, he wrote that “Fascist leaders believed that decadent democracies could never muster the necessary commitment and sacrifice.” Vladimir Putin has agreed with that theory too, speaking in disparaging tones, about Western decadence. A European Union publication summed it up well, stating that Putin believes “in essence, Europe has entered a phase of decadence, while Russia is in an ascending phase of its history.”
But Brands adds that this idea is absolutely wrong, writing, “But in reality, fascist regimes rooted in the hard logic of domination struggled to master the softer skills that were indispensable in an endeavor as complex as World War II.
In World War II, Hitler was the absolute ruler over military strategy and tactics, especially in the later years when he dictated military tactics on the Eastern front with Russia and after D-Day as allied forces rolled across France to decisively defeat the Nazi army.
As it turns out, military and political leadership does matters. Freedom does produce great leadership, and dictatorships eventually produce wooden leaders who cannot innovate and win.
As Holland wrote about WWII, “The German command structures were ridiculous – unwieldy, divisive and deeply unhelpful to the men and generals forces to work around parallel commands, vacillations and hash of orders.”
Holland concludes the authoritarianism in the Nazi (and Japanese) commands and the depletion of its top officers was a decisive factor in their defeat in World War II.
Also moving a bit closer to the present, the war in Ukraine also is revealing the failures of Russia’s stultified and inept military commands.
Allan Stam and Dan Reiter, writing in 2022 for the University of Virginia’s liberal Miller Center noted that “The unfolding war in Ukraine suggests autocracies enjoy few advantages on the battlefield. Ukraine is faring far better against Russia than many had projected”
The Center for Strategic and International Studies agrees, noting that in the Ukraine, Russia has suffered one million casualties, has won only a small percent of Ukraine’s territory and like Iran, has mainly used its missiles and drones to terrorize the Ukrainian public.
They concluded, “Russian military forces have failed to effectively advance along multiple axes in Ukraine, seized limited territory, lost substantial quantities of equipment relative to Ukraine, and suffered remarkably high rates of fatalities and casualties since January 2024.”
That brings us to Iran. At first blush, the Iranian military appears tough and unlikely to bend despite crushing blows from the U.S. and Israeli air forces.
But there are hints that the Iranian leadership is in disarray. Overall, they have failed to hit Israeli military bases and U.S. naval and air forces.
Instead, overall their ballistic missiles and drones toward both Israel and the Gulf States mainly miss military or strategic targets. Of course, they have hit a number of American bases, but most of their attacks have hit civilian sites. Their missiles are largely unguided.
Unable to accurately direct their missiles, like the Russians in the Ukraine, their overall attempt is to terrorize the people living both inside Israel and inside Muslim Gulf states.
This is a bankrupt military policy, however, although the Western press has decided to ignore this important feature of the Tehran’s failing military strategy.
Second, with most of the top civilian and religious leadership apparently gone, it appears that the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) are ascendant.
Inside Iran, a news site published by European-based Iranians, wrote today, “Rising tensions between the (Iranian President) Pezeshkian administration and Iran’s military leadership have pushed the president into a ‘complete political deadlock,’ with the Revolutionary Guard effectively assuming control over key state functions, informed sources told Iran International.”
If we can read the tea leaves, it seems as if the Revolutionary Guards are opposed to any negotiations with the Trump administration. Instead, the surviving civilian leadership would like to sue for at least a temporary ceasefire and meet with American negotiators in Pakistan.
Third, it’s interesting that the Iranians now are diplomatically isolated. The momentum towards a negotiated settlement is coming from Iran’s putative allies – Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt – and perhaps China.
These states are showing irritation with the surviving leadership in Iran. This isn’t good for the mullahs and for the IRGC.
Fourth, as I mentioned in my previous Substack, the Russian and Chinese new global alliance, called BRICS, is unraveling. It’s BRICS alliance members states – India, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Indonesia – have remained on the sidelines during the. conflict. This is a major political and diplomatic disaster for both Moscow and China.
Finally, the Gulf States, mainly the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, are urging Israel and the United States to continue the war. Most of the Gulf States are furious with Tehran and want Washington and Tel Aviv to do whenever it takes to defeat the Iranians.
This development is a terrific defeat for Tehran and its “Axis of Resistance.” The Iranian leadership now is writing a future that can unite Israel and its Arab neighbors.
Russia and China are clearly authoritarian military states – and importantly, with failing armies.
In the Ukraine, the failure of Russia’s authoritarian army and its military leadership is crystal clear.
And if you haven’t noticed (the mainstream media mainly hasn’t) the China’s People’s Liberation Army now is in total disarray.
According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, of the six generals appointed to the Central Military Commission in 2022, only one remains, creating a major power vacuum at the top of China’s military.
Further, over 85% of 47 senior PLA leaders surveyed were either purged or implicated between January 2022 and February 2026, according to the Center for Strategic International Studies.
President Trump has scheduled a national address tonight. Will he announce a ceasefire? Or an expansion of the war? It’s unclear.
But this is clear: dictatorships produce terrible war fighters and leaders.
And we’re witnessing this in the 2026 war with Iran.
(Views expressed by guest commentators may not reflect the views of OAN or its affiliates.)
Richard Pollock is a former New Left activist and was a roommate with Chicago 7 defendant Rennie Davis. He understands New Left strategy and tactics. For four decades, Richard was an investigative reporter based in Washington, D.C. Among his positions, he served as the senior investigative reporter for the Washington Examiner, the Daily Caller News Foundation, and at OAN. While at OAN he served in the Washington, D.C. bureau and hosted its investigative reporting specials. He is semi-retired and his posts from D.C. can be read on Substack.com
What do YOU think? Click here to jump to the comments!
Sponsored Content Below