AMNA NAWAZ: Good evening.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

GEOFF BENNETT: And I'm Geoff Bennett.

On the "News Hour" tonight: Israel launches a new round of attacks on Iran, and Iran retaliates, renewing their regional war and threatening to upend the Trump administration's diplomatic efforts in the region.

AMNA NAWAZ: Washington, D.C., prepares to host President Trump's military parade, costing millions and sparking protests nationwide.

GEOFF BENNETT: And the White House accuses Mexico of stealing water from Texas farmers in one of the country's most important agricultural regions.

ALEX RACELIS, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley: The U.S. population has increased by three times since 1940 and Mexico by seven times.

So you just have a ton of users, less consistent input of water, which makes it very contentious.

(BREAK) GEOFF BENNETT: Welcome to the "News Hour."

Tonight, two longtime adversaries in the Middle East are at war.

Massive explosions from an onslaught of Iranian missiles have rocked Israel's largest cities, including Tel Aviv.

AMNA NAWAZ: The U.S. says it's helping to intercept those missiles, which are retaliation for preemptive Israeli strikes that killed top military officers and targeted Iran's nuclear facilities late last night and into today.

That includes a strike on an aboveground facility that led to chemical and radiation contamination.

That's according to the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency.

Both Israel's brazen attack and Iran's unprecedented response have world leaders concerned that the fighting will only escalate.

As night fell in Tel Aviv, the protective Iron Dome system worked to intercept incoming Iranian missiles, hundreds, according to Iran's state-run news agency, launched in revenge, the damage devastating and unlike any Israel had seen in years.

Last night, the sky above Tehran glowed red and buildings below were set ablaze, as Israel carried out a punishing wave of what it called preemptive strikes on military leaders, nuclear facilities and nuclear scientists in Iran, part of an assault Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said was years in the making to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran.

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, Israeli Prime Minister: Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a targeted military operation to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival.

This operation will continue for as many days as it takes to remove this threat.

AMNA NAWAZ: Israeli strikes last night and today hit multiple sites across the country, among them, nuclear targets, several of Iran's main enrichment facilities at Natanz and Fordow.

Ballistic missile sites at Shiraz and Kermanshah were also hit.

Other strikes took out key leaders, including Mohammad Bagheri, the military's commander in chief, and General Hossein Salami, chief of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Tehran deployed a swarm of more than 100 drones overnight, which the IDF says it shot down.

And Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, warned of severe punishment, a message echoed by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.

MASOUD PEZESHKIAN, Iranian President (through translator): The Iranian nation and its officials will not remain silent in the face of this crime.

The Islamic Republic of Iran's legitimate and powerful response will make the enemy regret its foolish actions.

AMNA NAWAZ: The U.S. response to the strikes evolved over the hours.

In a late-night statement, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said -- quote -- "Israel took unilateral action against Iran.

We are not involved in strikes against Iran."

But, this morning, President Trump told multiple reporters the U.S. knew an Israeli attack was coming, warning in one interview that there is -- quote -- "more to come, a lot more," and in another saying that Iran -- quote -- "should now come to the table to make a deal before it's too late."

In 2018, during Trump's first term, he pulled out of the 2015 Obama era nuclear deal that severely restrained Iran's nuclear fuel enrichment and stockpiles.

In recent months, the Trump White House, led by envoy Steve Witkoff, restarted that effort, holding multiple rounds of talks with Iran to restrict their nuclear program.

Today, after huddling with national security staff in the Situation Room, the president told Axios -- quote -- "Maybe now they will negotiate seriously."

A sixth round of talks was scheduled for this Sunday in Oman.

U.S. forces in the meantime are pivoting in preparation, repositioning military resources in the Middle East, including ships and jets, and ramping up security at regional bases, bracing for what comes next, as two old adversaries begin a new war.

For more on Israel's goals and what comes next, we're joined now by the Israeli ambassador to the U.S., Yechiel Leiter.

Ambassador Leiter, welcome back to the "News Hour."

Thank you for joining us.

YECHIEL LEITER, Israeli Ambassador to the United States: Thank you, Amna.

It's good to be with you.

AMNA NAWAZ: I want to begin by asking you about the latest we're seeing of the extraordinary Iranian missile attacks unfolding over Tel Aviv at this moment.

As we speak, what can you tell us about the latest on the ground?

What kind of damage has been inflicted so far in Israel?

YECHIEL LEITER: Well, we know, at present, there are 35 people injured right outside of Tel Aviv, two critically.

We're praying for their survival.

Iran has a very large array of ballistic missiles.

They have fired them in the past, both in April and in October.

At that time, we were able to intercept them.

Several have gotten through this time, a total of 85 in this barrage.

These are huge missiles.

And we do have -- we have sustained injuries.

AMNA NAWAZ: A U.S. official said today that the U.S. military is helping to intercept some of those Iranian missiles.

Are you expecting U.S. forces to participate more deeply than that when it comes to defending Israel?

Is that something that Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump spoke about today?

YECHIEL LEITER: The United States has had our back, both in April and October.

There are anti-aircraft missiles that have been set in the Middle East to help support our Iron Dome system.

This is a barrage of dozens of missiles all at the same time, and it needs a support system.

And we're very, very thankful for the defensive posture that the United States has taken now for a third time in helping to prevent these missiles from exacting dramatic damage on our civilian population.

It's important to emphasize, I mean, when we attacked yesterday in Tehran, we focus on the military commanders and the scientists developing nuclear weapons.

Iran has shot ballistic missiles into civilian population centers with the hope of injuring and killing scores of innocent people.

AMNA NAWAZ: Can I ask, is there any expectation, any conversation that's been had about the U.S. or U.S. forces participating more deeply than intercepting missiles, as they have so far?

YECHIEL LEITER: e have begun this operation with the intention of eliminating Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities.

We are intent on completing this.

We have not asked for American involvement, only for help with protecting our civilian population.

And we're committed to seeing this process through until the threat of nuclear annihilation by Iran is removed.

AMNA NAWAZ: And what can you tell us about the damage Israel has been able to inflict on Iran so far?

Has their nuclear program been destroyed?

Has it been severely degraded?

What's your assessment?

YECHIEL LEITER: It's been severely degraded, but we have a ways to go.

This is not something that can be done in a few hours.

The top brass of the IRGC -- that's the terrorist-sponsoring leadership -- next to the army has pretty much been eliminated.

Many of the top brass in the army that were responsible for the nuclear weaponization program have been eliminated.

The site of Natanz, where uranium is enriched to be turned into a nuclear weapon, has been severely damaged.

We're not quite sure that it's been eliminated yet, but that needs to be determined over the next few hours.

The conversion center for fuel in order to turn fuel into material that can be used for weaponization has been compromised in Isfahan.

We also have compromised the ground-to-air missile batteries that the Iranian regime uses to shoot into Israel.

We have compromised them dramatically, but not quite eliminated them.

So this is an operation that will take several days, and we're committed to seeing it through.

We have to erase this threat to our existence.

This is not a border dispute.

This is a threat to our existence.

They make no secret about it.

The Iranian regime has made a very concrete plan.

It's actually a printed plan, and which calls for the destruction of the state of Israel.

And that's not something we can live with.

For us, it's existential.

AMNA NAWAZ: We saw Prime Minister Netanyahu say that obviously part of the goal here is preventing Iran from becoming nuclear-armed.

But we also heard him speak directly to the Iranian people.

He said: "We're also clearing the path for you to achieve your freedom.

This is your opportunity to stand up and let your voices be heard."

Ambassador, is regime change in Iran part of the goal here?

YECHIEL LEITER: Well, it's not part of our goal.

If it facilitates the goal of the Iranian people, that's fine.

But regimes have to be determined by the people.

That's how the democratic process works.

So we don't focus on regime change.

We want militarization change.

We want the annihilationist ideology of the regime to change.

If the Iranian people rise up, as they have tried to do in the past, and change their regime, that's for them to decide, not for us to decide.

AMNA NAWAZ: As you know, there were ongoing talks between the U.S. and Iran to restrict their nuclear program when Israel struck Iran.

There was another round scheduled for this Sunday.

Do you want to see those talks move forward?

Do you have confidence that they could reach a deal?

YECHIEL LEITER: We'd like to see the talks move forward, but we're not confident that the Iranians will come around to a deal.

We were skeptical from the outset.

We encouraged the talks because it's important to try to pursue a path of negotiation, rather than a military one.

But the fact of the matter is that the Iranians are ideologically and theologically committed to destroying Israel.

And they have no intention whatsoever of drawing back their nuclear program, nuclear weaponization program.

Look, the fact of the matter is that the president of the United States gave the Iranians 60 days.

Yesterday was the 61st day.

It's over, number one.

Number two, the IAEA issued a scathing report.

This is not an Israeli report.

This is an International Atomic Agency report, which basically indicted the Iranian regime for violations and for the development of a nuclear weapons program.

And we see -- this is the most important point, Amna.

We see in our intel that they're racing forward to achieve the weaponization of enriched uranium.

That means a nuclear bomb.

That changes the world.

And, for us, it changes the entire equation because it endangers our very existence.

We can't live with that.

AMNA NAWAZ: That is the Israeli ambassador to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, joining us tonight.

Ambassador Leiter, thank you for your time.

We appreciate it.

YECHIEL LEITER: Thank you, Amna.

Good evening.

GEOFF BENNETT: And for a wider perspective, we turn now to Wendy Sherman, who was the lead negotiator for the nuclear agreement with Iran during the Obama administration.

She served as U.S. deputy secretary of state during the Biden administration and is currently a senior fellow at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.

And Vali Nasr is a professor of international affairs and Middle East studies at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.

And he's also the author of "Iran's Grand Strategy: A Political History."

Our thanks to you both for joining us.

Wendy Sherman, we will start with you.

The U.S. says it was not involved in Israel's strikes against Iran's nuclear sites.

But is this attack, in your view, is it aligned with U.S. interests?

Or does it introduce new and unpredictable risks for U.S. forces and regional stability?

WENDY SHERMAN, Former U.S.

Undersecretary of State: I think it certainly introduces a lot of risk for all of the military personnel, some 40,000, in the region, and the hundreds of thousands of Americans in Israel, as well as in the wider region.

There is no question that all of us don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon.

That was the whole reason that President Obama asked Secretary Clinton, Secretary Kerry, and myself to work hard to get a joint comprehensive plan of action with Iran to put constraints on its nuclear program.

Donald Trump, in his first term as president, as you know, in 2018, pulled out of that deal.

I don't think we'd be where we are today if that hadn't happened.

And I think now we risk the potential for a much wider war.

We have seen now a strike by Israel, retaliation by Iran.

We have just heard from the ambassador, Ambassador Leiter, that this will go on for some time.

I expect tit for tat.

And we don't know who will get hurt in the process.

I'm certainly hoping that all who are injured in Israel make it through.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, Vali Nasr, you heard the Israeli ambassador say that Israel's goal was to eliminate Iran's enrichment facilities, that regime change was not their objective.

Do you agree?

Or do you think that Israel is aiming for something more right now?

VALI NASR, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University: I think the approximate excuse is to destroy Iran's nuclear program.

But I think Israel sees an opportunity to do much more.

Israel has come out of the October 7 issue, out of the Gaza war triumphant, confident in its own military capability.

It believes Iran is weaker, and it wants to press the advantage to essentially definitively change the balance of power between Iran and Israel, and, in fact, topple the Islamic Republic, which Prime Minister Netanyahu has repeatedly said that he would like to see happen.

And so I think the way that this attack happened, the fact that it went beyond hitting missile sites, nuclear sites, that it went against the top leadership of the state, and also hit civilian targets within Tehran and varieties of cities, indicated that Israel actually wants to degrade the institutional basis of the state, and, as Prime Minister Netanyahu addressed the Iranian people today, to pave the way for the collapse of the regime.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, Wendy Sherman, if Israel's initial strikes have degraded, not destroyed Iran's nuclear programming, what are the consequences of the region being on this cycle of repeated military action?

WENDY SHERMAN: Well, I think it's quite concerning.

Israel has said today, because Iran targeted civilians in Israel, that they have crossed a red line and that Israel will now go after economic infrastructure.

That is likely to include the oil and oil refineries inside of Iran.

We saw Saudi Arabia come out with a statement in support of Iran.

I think they understand that the price of oil is about to go way up if in fact this occurs.

And so I think we're seeing the potential for great destabilization in the region, not the stability that we all have been seeking.

Geoff, Vali understands this very well as well.

President Trump said that he would solve Ukraine, he would solve Gaza, get the hostages back, and get a deal with Iran.

None of that has happened, because all of this is quite hard work, can't be done in a day.

And for all Steve Witkoff has tried, it can't be all done by one human being.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, Vali Nasr, I mean, Israel's massive airstrike killed several senior commanders, Iranian commanders, including the head of its Revolutionary Guard.

What does that level of decapitation mean for Iran's ability to respond moving forward and for the stability of the regime itself?

VALI NASR: Well, I don't think the stability of the regime is at risk yet, unless a lot more happens.

But it does create confusion at the top.

But the issue in Iran is not just the killing of these leaders.

It's also the damage that has been done to the country's infrastructure, to its nuclear missile infrastructure.

That matters more.

But, also, a lot of civilians have died into Tehran, in other cities as well.

Close to at least 100 Iranians were killed because they -- some of the places that were hit by Israel in order to assassinate these leaders were residential areas.

So I think that line that Wendy mentioned has already been crossed by both sides, and that puts this conflict in a very different place.

And I don't see it stopping, because I don't see Iran being able right now to go to the table.

It cannot accept surrender.

It feels compelled that it has to retaliate.

And then that's going to invite additional retaliation.

And, to Wendy's point, President Trump started by saying he wanted diplomacy to win, and now he's going to earn himself a war that he said that he did not want and leave the region, I think, more unstable than when he arrived in office.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, if this current regime in Iran survives, do you expect it will try to rebuild its nuclear program, given how much it's been a point of national pride and a defiant symbol against the West?

Can you imagine any scenario where Iran might abandon that ambition?

VALI NASR: I do not see it, particularly now, because, if until now, their nuclear program was offered negotiation in exchange for sanctions relief, now Iran sees a very powerful military adversary, which is armed by the West, which is supported by the West, and it's capable and willing to act at will.

And if you're going to deter against it and confront it, conventional military capabilities that Iran has will not do it.

So it's a great temptation in Iran to resort to any nuclear deterrence against Israel.

It's not going to be easy for them, but I think the argument to do that is now much stronger in Iran.

GEOFF BENNETT: Should let our viewers know we had a technical issue with Wendy Sherman's shot coming into our control room.

So, Vali, final question now is, what would it take to rebuild any path to diplomacy between the U.S. and Iran?

Is that door closed for the foreseeable future?

VALI NASR: I think it's closed, because I think Iran views now President Trump as having been duplicitous.

He engaged in negotiations.

He was not very serious about it.

In fact, the very two -- first two meetings, the U.S. was not even prepared to discuss anything of substance.

And he said that war might be possible if the talks failed, but he gave a green light to Israeli action, and he's now taking pride in doing that, even before the talks failed, before the last -- the sixth round of the negotiation was supposed to happen.

It looks to Iranians that he is actually using the Israeli attack as part of the negotiations.

And that makes it very difficult for them to go back to the table.

President Trump wants Iran to surrender, not to sign a deal.

And Iran right now is not ready to surrender.

Maybe it will be down the road, but it's not ready right now.

GEOFF BENNETT: Vali Nasr, our thanks to you.

And, of course, our thanks to Wendy Sherman earlier as well.

We appreciate it.

VALI NASR: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: Turning now to the day's other headlines, more demonstrations against ICE deportations are expected in a number of cities tonight, but many protesters are saving their energy for a day of national protests against President Trump tomorrow.

In California, where protests first erupted about a week ago, the presence of U.S. Marines and the National Guard on the streets has been a flash point.

Reuters reported that the Marines carried out the first attention of a civilian this afternoon outside a federal building they are protecting.

There are bigger questions too about whether courts will allow the Guard and the Marines to remain for a second week.

Lisa Desjardins has our report.

LISA DESJARDINS: A rare sight, Marines on the street of a major U.S. city, today in Los Angeles guarding federal assets, this after a third night of curfews and arrests.

Local media reported dozens arrested, a figure notably lower than previous nights, and now more cities are seeing reactions.

(CHANTING) LISA DESJARDINS: In Chicago yesterday, hundreds marched down the city's iconic Michigan Avenue.

PROTESTER: ICE out of Chicago, ICE out of Illinois, ICE out of everywhere!

LISA DESJARDINS: Protests against ICE and Trump's immigration crackdown also arose in San Antonio, Texas; Portland, Oregon; Spokane, Washington; and several other cities.

In Newark, New Jersey, tumult outside a key ICE detention facility.

Protesters attempted to block officers at the gate.

At that location, four detainees escaped yesterday after breaking through a wall.

Attorneys say detainees complained about conditions, including a lack of food for nearly a day.

New Jersey Senator Andy Kim said the Trump administration mishandled this.

When SEN. ANDY KIM (D-NJ): And when they're talking about what action that they're taking, this is a perfect example of the shoddiness of this plan.

This is a symbol for the brokenness of the Trump administration plan when it comes to immigration.

LISA DESJARDINS: In California, legal upheaval over the National Guard.

A federal judge ruled last night that control must be returned to California Governor Gavin Newsom, but, hours later, an appellate court temporarily restored the president's deployment, pending a Tuesday hearing.

President Trump celebrated the appeals ruling on TRUTH Social: "If I didn't send the military to Los Angeles, that city would be burning to the ground right now."

The initial ruling from Judge Charles Breyer held that protests were far short of rebellion and Trump overstepped.

Governor Newsom: GOV.

GAVIN NEWSOM (D-CA): He is not a monarch.

He is not a king.

And he should stop acting like one.

LISA DESJARDINS: Protesters plan for that to be a theme tomorrow, when thousands of No King rallies are planned, but not in Washington, D.C.

The city is preparing for tomorrow's military parade for the Army's 250th birthday.

It's also Trump's birthday.

Officials are bracing for potential counterdemonstrators and also weather.

Thunderstorms are forecast.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Lisa Desjardins.

GEOFF BENNETT: Also today, a federal judge in Massachusetts today blocked part of President Trump's executive order aimed at overhauling elections.

Judge Denise Casper sided with Democrats in finding that the Constitution does not grant a president specific powers over voting.

Mr. Trump signed an order in March that would have required proof of citizenship for federal elections.

It also barred states from accepting mail-in ballots that arrived after Election Day.

Today's decision comes after a federal judge in Washington, D.C., also blocked the proof of citizenship requirement.

The White House has defended the order, saying it supports free, fair and honest elections.

In Tennessee, Kilmar Abrego Garcia pleaded not guilty today to federal charges of human smuggling.

It was the first time the construction worker and longtime Maryland resident has appeared in a U.S. courtroom since he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador in March.

The Trump administration brought him back to the U.S. last week to face criminal charges that stem from a 2022 traffic stop.

PROTESTERS: The people united will never be divided!

GEOFF BENNETT: Abrego Garcia's supporters called for his freedom outside the courthouse today.

And at a nearby church, his wife, Jennifer, described seeing her husband for the first time in three months.

JENNIFER VASQUEZ SURA, Wife of Kilmar Abrego Garcia: Kilmar was taken on March 12.

And it was not until yesterday that I was able to visit him for the first time.

I'm grateful for everyone who has been fighting for this milestone in this fight to bring my husband back home with our children.

GEOFF BENNETT: Meantime, a federal judge has sided with the Trump administration's push to keep Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil in detention.

That's despite a previous judge's order saying the pro-Palestinian activist could no longer be held based on the administration's initial argument that he's a threat to U.S. foreign policy.

The government now says Khalil is being held on other grounds, claiming that he lied on his green card application.

The head of the Smithsonian Portrait Gallery is stepping down two weeks after President Trump said on social media that he had fired her.

Kim Sajet's departure was announced in a memo to staff, which was provided to the "News Hour."

In it, she is quoted as saying: "This was not an easy decision, but I believe that stepping aside is the best way to serve the institution I hold so deeply in my heart."

Her announcement comes just days after the Smithsonian made a public statement asserting its independence over personnel decisions.

In India, investigators say they have recovered the flight data recorder from yesterday's Air India crash.

The black box should provide clues as to why the London-bound Boeing 787 fell from the sky just minutes after takeoff; 241 people died on board, as did several others at a medical college where the plane came down.

Today, scenes of grief, as families waited for DNA tests to identify the bodies of their loved ones.

At the crash site, India's prime minister toured the wreckage and then met the sole surviving passenger at a nearby hospital.

On Indian TV today, the 38-year-old described his miraculous escape.

VISWASHKUMAR RAMESH, Plane Crash Survivor (through translator): Everything happened in front of my eyes.

I don't know how I survived.

For some time, I thought I was also going to die, but, when I opened my eyes, I realized I was alive and tried to unbuckle myself from the seat and escape from where I could.

GEOFF BENNETT: Indian officials say they have started their investigation of the crash with what they're calling full force.

They will be joined by U.S. officials from the NTSB, the FAA, and Boeing.

On Wall Street today, stocks tumbled amid worries about the increasing tensions in the Middle East.

The Dow Jones industrial average dropped nearly 800 points on the day.

The Nasdaq fell more than 250 points.

The S&P 500 also ended the week sharply lower.

Still to come on the "News Hour": Washington, D.C., prepares for President Trump's military parade; Jonathan Capehart and Ramesh Ponnuru weigh in on the week's political headlines; and the ongoing feud between the U.S. and Mexico over Texas water rights.

Since his first term in office, President Trump has envisioned a grand military parade, and, on Saturday, it will become a reality.

The occasion, the U.S. Army's 250th birthday, which happens to coincide with President Trump's own birthday.

The multimillion-dollar spectacle promises a striking display of American military might.

But the event has also drawn scrutiny, with questions swirling about its cost and the political message it sends.

Dan Lamothe covers the U.S. military in Pentagon for The Washington Post and joins us now.

Thanks for being here.

DAN LAMOTHE, The Washington Post: Sure.

Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: So President Trump is getting this military parade that he's long wanted.

How did his vision for a Bastille Day-style parade evolve into this event marking the Army's 250th anniversary, which also happens to fall on President Trump's own birthday?

DAN LAMOTHE: Yes, I think the most significant piece here in terms of how we got to actually following through and doing it is that the Army approached the White House early in this administration, looking to do some sort of big national event to celebrate the 250 years of the Army.

That seems to have grown into what we are now looking at, which very much rhymes with some of the discussions we had during the first Trump administration, where that parade was sort of short-circuited and sort of reeled back into being more of an air show.

GEOFF BENNETT: And against the backdrop of the Trump administration's highly publicized efforts to cut costs at the federal level, there are estimates that place the parade's cost between $25 million and $45 million.

That includes money to protect and then repair the streets, given the weight of the armored vehicles.

Who's footing the bill for all this?

DAN LAMOTHE: The Army is for the most part.

I mean, this is money that comes out of operations and maintenance, things that could have been put toward training.

Whether or not there's a backfill on that money later, I think, is a question.

But, at the moment, this is coming out hide for the Army.

GEOFF BENNETT: How is the Pentagon responding to concerns that the military is being politicized?

There are critics who have compared this parade to authoritarian spectacles, the types you see in China, Russia, North Korea.

DAN LAMOTHE: Yes, I think the Army is trying to, like, kind of keep its head down and treat this as a celebration of history.

The challenge with that is that there is a lot of other things going on right now, including the National Guard in Los Angeles, including President Trump's visit to Fort Bragg, where you had not only him making political commentary in front of soldiers, but some of those soldiers actually laughing and booing on camera.

That's outside the bounds of what soldiers are supposed to be doing in uniform.

And the Army is kind of having to take that on the chin and figure out how they're going to manage that and stay out of politics.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, based on your reporting, I mean, how do you see all of this coming together?

What's the broader message and impact?

DAN LAMOTHE: Yes, I mean, I think the message is that we're looking at a very rare event.

I mean, we have had -- the last military parade we had was after the Gulf War.

I mean, it is rare to have something of this size and scope and Washington.

And I think what we will all be watching for is not just what rolls down the streets, but what happens on the margins?

What does the president say?

What does the brass have to sort of stand by and watch?

And at what point do they need to weigh in or not to try to keep this in a nonpartisan tradition?

GEOFF BENNETT: So what should we expect to see tomorrow?

DAN LAMOTHE: I mean, it's monstrous.

It's huge, dozens of tanks, helicopters, Bradley Fighting Vehicles, Stryker combat vehicles, thousands of soldiers in uniform.

This is something that is going to be quite the spectacle.

GEOFF BENNETT: Dan Lamothe of The Washington Post, thanks so much for being here.

DAN LAMOTHE: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: Israel's attack on Iran and Iran's response has Washington and the rest of the world holding its breath for an all-out war between the two regional powers.

To discuss that and more, we turn now to the analysis of Capehart and Ponnuru.

That is Jonathan Capehart, associate editor for "The Washington Post," and Ramesh Ponnuru, editor for "The National Review."

David Brooks is away this evening.

It's great to see you both.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Hey, Amna.

RAMESH PONNURU, Senior Editor, "The National Review": Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: Let's start overseas with the lead story tonight, this moment in time, Jonathan, where we saw these unprecedented strikes by Israel on Iran.

We're seeing the extraordinary response by Iran and, more broadly, a region that has been getting more and more unstable over the last several months.

How are you looking at that?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, I'm looking at that with great trepidation.

I mean, basically since October 7, the region has been roiling.

And at the center of it is Prime Minister Netanyahu, who understandably going after Hamas in Gaza, but then opening other fronts within the Middle East.

And this attack on Iran, it just strikes me that he is doing things that I'm not sure the president of the United States is totally bought in.

I'm not sure whether the United States -- whether he's either listening to American officials, who at least at one point the president was pleading, hey, don't do anything, hey, Iran, come to the table, and then switching once the attack started, saying, I'm all for it.

But the big thing here is, between what Netanyahu has done with Iran, coupled with what Prime Minister -- President Zelenskyy of Ukraine did in terms of not cluing in the United States in the big operation that they did inside, deep inside, Russia, makes me wonder, where's the United States in all of this?

Leave Trump out.

Have world leaders decided to just not think about the United States, not involve the United States simply because of who is in the Oval Office?

And when it comes to -- they were negotiating right now a new Iran nuclear deal that I -- Ramesh, maybe you can tell me.

Who's at the table with the Trump administration in these negotiations?

Because when President Obama was doing it, it was called the P5-plus-one.

You had China, France, the United Kingdom, the United States, Russia, plus Germany.

Those are the allies.

Where are the allies in all of this?

AMNA NAWAZ: Ramesh, to that point, these are conflicts Jonathan has listed President Trump said he was going to end on day one.

They have gotten worse.

We're opening up a new front here now in this war.

How do you look at that, President Trump's involvement, and, to Jonathan's point, the U.S. influence in the world right now?

RAMESH PONNURU: Well, it seems to me that Trump has kept his options open.

Today, Trump has been more or less taking credit for the Israeli strikes.

Last night, Secretary of State Marco Rubio took a more measured tone, where he was largely approving, but also keeping the United States at a distance from Israel's actions.

I strongly suspect that, if these actions by Israel had backfired in a big way, that the administration would have said, hey, we tried to warn you, we said we wanted peace, and this is not our doing.

But I think Israel has a very strong sense of itself having to take care of itself.

For at least two decades now, Israel and Netanyahu, in particular, has been warning about a nuclear Iran.

And I think what's happened after October 7 was that Israel has decided to make a strategic revolution in the region that has been largely successful.

One of the reasons I think we are seeing this strike is that Iran is at a weak point, and there's just no better time to make this strike as a result.

And then, at the same time, of course, you have got the nuclear threat, with the IAEA saying that enrichment has been accelerating by Iran.

Put those things together, and I think that this is something that Netanyahu wanted to do for a long time, and this was the time to do it.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, is this President Trump leaning into the moment now, taking advantage of what's clearly been Israel really reshaping a lot of the threats in the region, even when you look at the Iranian proxies, keeping his options open, and maybe, as he says, getting Iran to the negotiating table?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: I mean, who -- I don't know, Amna.

The guy, yes, he keeps his options open.

But is that the way to make policy in a region that is roiling right now, where you have a president of the United States who hedges his bets so much so that he can be on the side of the winner, as defined by him?

That's not a way to try to achieve peace or bring stability to a region that desperately needs it.

I mean, the -- and I go back to what I was saying before.

The United States used to be the stabilizing influence at the negotiating table and certainly within the region.

And, right now, the United States is as much a wild card, particularly with this president, as, say, the prime minister.

In this regard, given what you were just saying, it seems as though Prime Minister Netanyahu is the one who is the rational being, the person with a clear agenda and a clear goal.

And he's got a president of the United States who will bend to whomever he thinks is coming out on the good side, from his perspective.

RAMESH PONNURU: But we should also point out that Israel has often been independent of the United States.

That was true during the Biden and Obama years.

It was true during the George H.W.

Bush years as well.

The strike on Osirak was not something that they coordinated with the Reagan administration.

So this is -- there is plenty of precedent for Israel acting in its own interests.

AMNA NAWAZ: Outside of that, the Trump efforts towards diplomacy, which is what he seemed to be leading with, right, he can end the Ukrainian war, he can end the war in Gaza, and now there's a new front, have those now failed?

RAMESH PONNURU: I don't know how many people ever took those seriously Trump did repeatedly say that he was going to end Ukraine in one day, as though to get that message across.

AMNA NAWAZ: You never believed him?

RAMESH PONNURU: And since then, since he's taken office, he's basically been, oh, I -- that was more kind of metaphorical.

(LAUGHTER) AMNA NAWAZ: We will follow that as it continues to play out.

I do want to ask you about, of course, what's unfolding right back here on -- in the United States, and we're seeing the Trump administration response to those protests in Los Angeles, but other cities as well, against the immigration raids.

We saw him send in federal troops to California, against Governor Gavin Newsom's wishes.

We know that he's fighting in court to be able to keep them there, and that legal battle is unfolding.

But he's also threatening, Jonathan, to send troops to more cities.

What does all of this tell you about how the president views the use of federal troops and the military and also this priority of mass deportations as part of his agenda?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: OK, well, one, the priority of mass deportations was crystal clear during his campaign, so crystal clear that, during the convention, you may remember, in Milwaukee, they handed out signs to all the convention goers, "Mass Deportations."

So anyone who's surprised by what's happening should not be surprised.

He told us he was going to do this.

He's doing it.

My big -- we are at a turning point, I think, this weekend with what we have seen in the run-up to tomorrow's parade, with what's happening in Los Angeles.

More people's hair should be on fire not just because of the National Guard troops in Los Angeles without the -- working with or permission from the governor, which is by law what should have been done, but the calling up of Marines, U.S. military, on American streets.

That is a line that, to me, anyway, is one that should never have been crossed.

And the president putting out this order and putting out this order that isn't specific to Los Angeles, isn't specific to any city, it's so broad, the language is so broad that it's sort of like you could just tuck it into like a giant L.L.

Bean tote bag, and you just pull out, where do I need to send troops?

This should not be in the United States.

And yet you have got Democrats screaming about it, you have got citizens screaming about it, but where are Republicans?

I'm old enough to remember Republicans who would have seen that kind of action as being over the line.

And yet we're hearing nothing from them in this regard.

RAMESH PONNURU: For example, Kristi Noem, the secretary of homeland security who just last year was saying that Biden's deployment of National Guard in the United States would be an assault on states' rights.

So, yes, we're not hearing those voices that we should.

And in respect to that the broadness of that order... it's not also tied to protests possibly turning violent.

It simply says any place DHS enforcement actions are being protested.

So it's astonishingly broad, which is in keeping with an administration that constantly wants to probe the limits to see if it's going to get any pushback, either legally or politically, on its grand claims of power.

But it's also a part of another pattern in this administration, which is to accomplish as little as possible in the most disruptive and polarizing way possible.

I think we have seen that with DOGE.

And here, on the immigration side, there are other ways you could be enforcing the immigration laws.

You could be setting up a system where employers have to check the legal status of new hires and require them to do it.

We can work with Congress to get that kind of law passed.

It's the kind of thing that immigration policy experts have talked about for a long time, including some Democrats.

That's not what we're talking about here.

What we're talking about is having the most backlash-likely action to create the political conflict, which is what the administration seems most interested in seeing.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: And I think they're creating the political conflict because -- I interviewed Minnesota State Attorney General Keith Ellison in the run-up to the anniversary, the fifth anniversary of the murder of George Floyd.

And he brought up on his own the rumor that the president was going to pardon Derek Chauvin.

And the attorney general said that the president might do that as a distraction to larger goals.

And one of the larger goals that the attorney general mentioned that has always been in the back of my mind is to create the conditions that would allow the president to invoke the Insurrection Act.

And once the president invokes the Insurrection Act, all sorts of powers are handed to the president, suspending elections and other things, that, once you open that box, and particularly you open that box with this president and the administration and the yes-people he has around him, there's no going back.

That is among the reasons why I am so concerned about what we're about to see tomorrow.

AMNA NAWAZ: You share that concern?

RAMESH PONNURU: I... AMNA NAWAZ: We only have about 30 seconds left.

I apologize.

Go ahead.

RAMESH PONNURU: Listen, I think there are lots of things to be concerned about here.

But I think one of the reasons Trump is maybe getting away with this, even though people disapprove of a lot of the methods, they don't think the Democrats are serious about enforcing the immigration laws, and they do think that they need to be enforced.

AMNA NAWAZ: A lot more to talk about here.

Thank you both so much for being here.

Always a smart conversation.

Ramesh Ponnuru, Jonathan Capehart, appreciate you both.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Thanks, Amna.

GEOFF BENNETT: In a social media post earlier this year, President Trump threatened tariffs and sanctions against Mexico, claiming the country violated a 1944 treaty and his stealing water from Texas farmers.

It's part of a long-running dispute over shared water in the Rio Grande River, a dispute that scientists say is made worse by higher temperatures, extreme weather and a greater demand for water.

Stephanie Sy reports from Texas for our series on the impact of climate change, Tipping Point.

STEPHANIE SY: From Texas State Highway 107 in Santa Rosa, the Rio Grande Valley Sugar Mill strikes an imposing figure.

TUDOR UHLHORN, Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc.: We're in the sugar warehouse.

Sugar would fill this entire warehouse as its being processed.

STEPHANIE SY: But it's sat empty since the mill closed its doors last year.

TUDOR UHLHORN: We started disassembly pretty much almost immediately.

STEPHANIE SY: Tudor Uhlhorn is a former sugarcane grower and the mill's last chairman of the board.

TUDOR UHLHORN: I don't come out here like I used to with pride that I'm a sugar grower.

I come out and it's sad to see that this whole industry is gone now.

Symbolically, it is a reflection of nobody cares about us in the Rio Grande Valley.

STEPHANIE SY: The closure of Texas' last sugar mill, which once employed 500 people and processed about 160,000 tons of raw sugar annually, coincided with years of increasing water scarcity in the region.

The Rio Grande Valley is one of the few places in the U.S. where sugarcane will grow, but it takes a lot of water.

TUDOR UHLHORN: Farmers are plowing out cane because no one has any irrigation water.

We just got completely choked off by Mexico's failure to deliver the water.

STEPHANIE SY: That water is owed to farmers here in the Rio Grande Valley as part of a more-than-80-year-old treaty that requires Mexico to share some of the water that winds through its land.

Signed in 1944, the treaty establishes that the U.S. will release a minimum of nearly 500 billion gallons of water from the Colorado River to Mexico annually, providing water for agriculture in the Mexicali Valley and drinking water for large cities like Tijuana.

In return, Mexico will release a minimum of 114 billion gallons of water from the Rio Conchos and other tributaries to the Rio Grande annually, providing water for farmers and residents in the Rio Grande Valley.

The treaty stipulates that any water debt should carry over to the next five-year cycle in times of extraordinary drought.

But critics say drought is not the only reason Mexico hasn't upheld its end of the bargain.

SONNY HINOJOSA, Former Water District General Manager, Hidalgo County Irrigation District No.

2: Mexico is capturing the water that used to flow freely into the Rio Grande.

STEPHANIE SY: Sonny Hinojosa is a former water district general manager in Hidalgo County, Texas.

SONNY HINOJOSA: Since the treaty was signed in 1944, these other eight additional reservoirs were constructed.

STEPHANIE SY: He says Mexico's construction of additional reservoirs has allowed them to keep more of the water before it flows to Texas.

They have fallen short of their obligations to the U.S. five times since the 1990s, even when a tropical storm filled Mexico's reservoirs with over 700 billion gallons of water in 2022.

SONNY HINOJOSA: Mexico didn't release any of that water to comply with the terms of the treaty for the next couple of years.

STEPHANIE SY: The current five-year delivery cycle ends in October.

But, so far, Mexico has released less than 40 percent of what it owes.

SONNY HINOJOSA: Our farmers will once again be faced with shortages.

They either don't plant or they plant reduced acreage.

That's just the way it is.

STEPHANIE SY: Across the southern border, the dependence on the Rio Grande's main tributary, the Rio Conchos, has led to desperation.

Drought has brought this community in the state of Chihuahua out to a lakeside mass.

They pray for rain.

RAFAEL BETANCE, Volunteer Monitor, La Boquilla Dam (through translator): The situation is very critical.

So we need to ask God to send us the rain.

That's the only solution we have for everything.

STEPHANIE SY: For 30 years, Rafael Betance has been measuring the La Boquilla Dam, which stores water from the Rio Conchos.

He says the terms of the 80-year-old treaty are impossible to fulfill these days.

RAFAEL BETANCE (through translator): The commitments they made were when there were surpluses of the dams, when it spilled over, when it rained a lot.

Right now, where do we give them water from?

It hasn't rained for two or three years.

That's the problem.

STEPHANIE SY: The scarcity of water isn't merely due to a lack of rain.

Farms in the region have significantly expanded their acreage in the last few years.

An aging irrigation infrastructure means farmers there are wasting water.

Miles from the dam, farmer Fidel Hidalgo Tarano waters his five-acre walnut grove for the first time in a month-and-a-half by flooding the field, one of the least efficient irrigation techniques.

FIDEL HIDALGO TARANO, Farmer (through translator): I think all of us, those of us who farm, are aware that we are wasting a lot of water.

If there were another watering system, a sprinkler irrigation system or belt system, it takes a lot of money, and it's expensive per hectare.

STEPHANIE SY: Chihuahua is a major producer of walnuts, a water-intensive crop that demands even more irrigation on hotter, drier days.

ALEX RACELIS, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley: It has gotten hotter.

The annual average temperature has changed, increased by almost three degrees.

The average annual number of days over 100 has increased fivefold since 1950.

STEPHANIE SY: Alexis Racelis is an environmental scientist at the University of Texas, Rio Grande Valley.

He says the impacts of climate change, higher temperatures coupled with less predictable rains, have strained water resources, as has an increase in demand.

ALEXIS RACELIS: The U.S. population has increased by three times since 1940 and Mexico by seven times.

So you just have a ton of users, less consistent input of water, which makes it very contentious.

STEPHANIE SY: Racelis works directly with local farmers in the Rio Grande Valley to adapt to a new climate reality, one with less water.

ALEXIS RACELIS: When you look at climate change predictions, where it's only predicted to get hotter and that the periods of drought are predicted to get even more prolonged, and you combine that with the fact that the population is expected to increase, it's pretty grim for agriculture.

STEPHANIE SY: At Hub of Prosperity, a small off-campus farm operated by the University of Texas, Rio Grande Valley, he demonstrates water-efficient farming techniques and promotes a variety of vegetables that can grow in a hotter climate.

ALEXIS RACELIS: Farmers are very resilient.

They're very innovative.

They're coming up with their own techniques that we're helping them explore.

DALE MURDEN, President, Texas Citrus Mutual: That across the street was an orchard.

We were starting to hit that uncertainty of water.

STEPHANIE SY: For most of his life, Dale Murden has been a citrus grower.

He's also president of Texas Citrus Mutual, representing hundreds of other farmers in the state.

DALE MURDEN: This is really not what you want a grove to look like.

STEPHANIE SY: The rough shape of this grower grapefruit grove illustrates the difficult choices growers are having to make in an era of scarcity.

DALE MURDEN: This grove should have already been watered a couple of times this year, and we probably should have had two -- at least two waterings more on this than it has, but that's where we're at with limited supply of water or no water.

And so you kind of tend to let things go like we control.

STEPHANIE SY: Murden watched as the sugarcane industry in the Rio Grande Valley folded, wondering if citrus was next.

DALE MURDEN: What does the future hold?

If I can't even count on my neighbor giving me the annual payment like we do on the Colorado side, man, it renders me really, really incapable of the ability to plan for long range.

STEPHANIE SY: Calls from Texas lawmakers to force Mexico to deliver water more reliably have been echoed by the president.

In April, Trump raised the prospect of escalating tariffs and possible sanctions -- quote -- "until Mexico honors the treaty."

In response, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum acknowledged her country's shortcomings and released roughly 18 billion gallons of water.

DALE MURDEN: It's definitely on this administration's radar, for whatever reason.

There's chips in every trade negotiation.

If I'm being used as a chip, so be it.

At least we're getting the attention.

STEPHANIE SY: But the attention may be too little, too late.

That's certainly the case for Texas' sugarcane industry, the first, but likely not the last casualty of this water battle.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Stephanie Sy in the Rio Grande Valley.

AMNA NAWAZ: Remember, there's always a lot more online, including an explainer on the $1,000 accounts that would be started for newborn babies under the congressional budget bill.

That is at PBS.org/NewsHour.

GEOFF BENNETT: And be sure to tune into "Washington Week With The Atlantic" later tonight right here on PBS.

The panel discusses Israel and Iran's escalating war.

AMNA NAWAZ: And watch "PBS News Weekend" for coverage of the nationwide protests planned on the same day as President Trump's military parade.

And that is the "News Hour" for tonight.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

GEOFF BENNETT: And I'm Geoff Bennett.

For all of us here at the "PBS News Hour," thanks for spending part of your evening with us and have a great weekend.