House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul discussed a developing policy proposal in Washington, describing a bill under consideration by the United States House of Representatives. The measure would authorize the use of military force if the conflict between Israel and Hamas escalates into a broader war that could draw in Iran. The chairman’s remarks came amid rising concern about how quickly the regional crisis could widen and involve additional state and non-state actors.
McCaul stated that the purpose of the draft legislation is to provide a clear framework for action should the United States determine that a larger, sustained military engagement is necessary. He added that he would prefer never to sign such a bill, signaling the weight of the decision and the potential consequences for American troops and national security interests. Still, he warned that the situation in the Middle East is deteriorating with each passing day, and that policy makers must be prepared for options that could involve a broader regional conflict.
In explaining the scope of the draft, McCaul indicated that the text would likely refer to Iran through its proxies rather than naming the country explicitly as a state actor. He cited groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Shiite militias that receive backing from Iran as the lead entities in any potential escalation. The congressman noted that if Iranian military forces were to join the fighting in a direct manner, the policy would require a reassessment to determine whether it would be appropriate to expand the authorization to include a direct contribution from Iran itself, potentially altering the scope of the intervention.
Separately, at the United Nations Security Council, Palestine’s permanent representative, Riyad Mansour, highlighted the scale of the humanitarian displacement caused by ongoing Israeli operations in the Gaza Strip. Mansour, briefing the Council, estimated that more than 1 million Palestinians had left their homes since the conflict intensified, a statistic that underscored the severe civilian impact of the war and the urgency of international attention to protection and humanitarian access—and to efforts aimed at achieving a ceasefire that can lay the groundwork for negotiations.
Across the broader international press landscape, outlets tracking the conflict have repeatedly emphasized the volatility of the situation, including questions about the timing and feasibility of any large-scale intervention in the region. Analysts point to the risk that a miscalculation by any party could provoke a wider regional spillover, complicating diplomatic efforts and potentially triggering a sequence of responses among allied governments. In this context, policymakers are weighing not only military options but also the diplomatic, humanitarian, and economic dimensions of any sustained action. References to these considerations often appear in major coverage and briefings, where officials underscore both the potential costs and the imperative of mitigating civilian harm while pursuing strategic objectives. (Source: Congressional briefings and UNSC statements)