ISRAEL GOES ON ALERT AS U.S. EMBASSIES ISSUE WARNINGS ACCROSS MIDDLE EAST - w/ FDD's Clifford May

Summary

Mario Nawfal opened by asking Clifford May to assess the risk of renewed war. He cited State Department security warnings across the Middle East, Israeli military alert levels, Iranian missile tests, and reports that Iran had rebuilt much of its missile-launch capacity. Nawfal also pointed to depleted Israeli interceptors, attacks on shipping, and high diesel prices as signs of the conflict’s costs.

May said he could not predict President Trump’s next move, but argued that the conflict with Iran long predated the recent fighting. In his view, Iran’s hostility toward the United States and Israel dates to the 1979 revolution, and its growing nuclear, missile, and drone capabilities made a response necessary. He said the current task was to weigh military and economic options and prevent Iran from rebuilding its capabilities or threatening freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. May was skeptical that Iran would accept a durable deal or verifiably abandon its nuclear ambitions.

Nawfal opposed the war and said diplomacy had been possible before it began, including through negotiations involving Oman. He argued that hostile rhetoric should be distinguished from military action, and that a country’s conduct should be judged by its policies, not only by its leaders’ statements. The two also differed over whether Iran’s rhetoric amounted to a declaration of war.

On Iran’s government, May emphasized a distinction between the Iranian people and the Islamic Republic. He claimed that many Iranians oppose the regime and that it has brutally suppressed protests and supported armed groups abroad. Nawfal said he condemns the IRGC and its actions, but opposed military intervention and stressed that the United States and other regional powers also bear responsibility for harmful policies. Their exchange broadened into a discussion of how difficult it is to assign simple labels of “good” and “bad” to states and conflicts.

The discussion then turned to Syria and regional power. May described Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea as governments with shared interests in weakening U.S. influence, and argued that Turkey seeks to expand its influence in Syria. He portrayed Israel’s posture in southern Syria as primarily defensive and linked it to protecting the Druze. Nawfal questioned whether Israel, like Turkey, also benefits from influence over a weak Syria.

They disagreed over Israel’s conduct in Gaza and Lebanon. May cited Israel’s past withdrawals from territory, including Gaza and southern Lebanon, and argued that those areas subsequently became bases for attacks. He said Hamas rejects peaceful coexistence and that Israel’s campaign aimed to defeat it, while Hamas could have ended the fighting by releasing hostages. Nawfal said he feared that Israeli politicians’ annexationist rhetoric and the destruction in Gaza and Lebanon could fuel further extremism. He also worried that personal grief and civilian suffering can radicalize people. May rejected the idea that Israel’s goal in Gaza was to make it unlivable for annexation, and argued that Israel took steps to limit civilian casualties.

The conversation briefly touched on Africa’s neglected conflicts and violence against Christian communities, as well as unrest in France, which both associated with a mix of immigration and economic pressures. The discussion ended amicably, with both describing the exchange as useful despite their disagreements.

Presenters and Contributors

• Mario Nawfal — Host
• Clifford May — President of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD)