This is the Reason interview. I'm Zach Weissmuller. Thanks for listening. This is the audio

version of a video live stream that takes place every Thursday at 1 p.m. Eastern time. Go to reason.com

to check that out in real time or to our YouTube channel, YouTube.com forward slash reason TV.

Despite clear interests on almost all sides against a regional war in the Middle East,

all sides are acting in a manner that makes such a war increasingly likely,

writes Trita Parsi in an October 15th article calling for the Biden administration to push

for de-escalation between Israel and

Hamas. Parsi is the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft,

a DC think tank that promotes a more restrained U.S. foreign policy. He was the former head of

the National Iranian-American Council and author of several

books, including a treacherous alliance, the secret dealings of Israel, Iran, and the U.S.

He says that although the Biden administration is well aware of escalation risks, that might

lead to a broader regional war, talk of de-escalation remains off-limits.

The Huffington Post reported late last week that it had obtained State Department memos,

instructing employees to avoid terms like de-escalation, seize fire, end to violence and

bloodshed, and restoring calm in press materials and statements.

But is de-escalation even feasible after Hamas slaughtered Israeli civilians and continues to hold close to 200 hostages?

How should Israel respond to the worst terrorist attack in its history?

What can U.S. policymakers do to make the

prospect of a bigger war less likely? Reasons Liz Wolf and I discussed these questions and more with

Parsi, and Liz and I also revisited the topic of domestic reactions to the Hamas attack, namely

the comments of a Cornell professor who claimed

...