Former Iraqi diplomat says U.S.-Iran exchange of strikes is widening the regional conflict, driving forces beyond direct battlefield targets

Geoff Bennett of PBS NewsHour spoke with Feisal Istrabadi, a former Iraqi diplomat and founding director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East at Indiana University Bloomington, to discuss what he described as the drivers behind a widening regional conflict tied to the U.S. and Iran. The interview aired July 29, 2026, as fighting and security incidents continue to affect states across the Middle East, with public attention focused on how strikes and counter-strikes may be changing the scale and direction of the conflict.

Bennett’s segment framed the discussion around “the forces driving Iran war across the region,” emphasizing the role of a pattern in which the United States and Iran exchange strikes. Istrabadi, speaking as an Iraqi diplomatic voice familiar with regional security dynamics, focused on how that exchange can extend beyond the immediate targets of any single operation, influencing the behavior of other actors and raising the risk of further escalation.

The former diplomat’s central point, as presented in the interview, was that the region’s conflict trajectory is not determined only by the presence or absence of direct U.S.-Iran confrontation. Instead, he described how retaliatory logic and strike cycles can create incentives and pressures for other parties, including those with varying interests and capabilities, to respond in ways that broaden the crisis beyond its original parameters.

Istrabadi also connected the widening conflict to the practical limits of military operations and the political constraints faced by governments trying to manage domestic stability and regional relationships. In that view, each episode of escalation can increase uncertainty, reduce room for negotiation, and harden public and institutional positions, making it harder to separate counterterror and deterrence goals from wider security competition.

The interview context highlighted that viewers are watching an evolving security landscape in which the consequences of strike actions can unfold across borders and across different kinds of incidents, not only through the headline events of major raids or missile or drone attacks. Istrabadi’s remarks were aimed at explaining why the regional impact can outlast the initial strike exchange and why the downstream effects may be difficult to contain once momentum builds.

Although the segment focused on broader dynamics, it also underscored the relevance of diplomatic and institutional experience for interpreting how conflicts spread. As a former Iraqi diplomat, Istrabadi’s framing emphasized the importance of understanding the incentives of regional governments and communities that must live with the fallout from repeated security shocks.

The interview leaves open the question of how policymakers can reduce escalation risks while maintaining pressure on security threats, and it also suggests that any effort to slow the spiral will require addressing more than the immediate strike exchange itself. For audiences tracking developments in the Middle East, the interview offers a lens on why escalation can become self-reinforcing, even when official rationales focus on deterrence or responses to specific attacks.

In the near term, the regional security environment described in the discussion implies heightened scrutiny of how U.S. and Iranian actions are communicated and calibrated, and how regional actors interpret deterrence and retaliation. The transcript also indicates that journalists and analysts will continue to look for linkages between strike cycles and the wider patterns of instability affecting multiple countries, especially where governments, militaries, and local communities face compounded safety and economic pressures.