At the IAC 10th National Summit in Hollywood, Florida, Farzan Seyedi joined U.S. Rep. Rich McCormick, Iran expert Beni Sabti, and moderator Marjan Keypour Greenblatt for a wide-ranging discussion on Iran, Israel, protests, U.S. policy, and political transition.
On January 17, 2026, the Israeli-American Council's 10th National Summit brought together political leaders, Iran specialists, activists, and members of the Iranian and Israeli-American communities at the Diplomat Beach Resort in Hollywood, Florida. One of the summit's Iran-focused breakout sessions, "The Iranian Front: Strategic Debrief," featured U.S. Rep. Rich McCormick, Iran affairs expert Beni Sabti, Iranian political activist Farzan Seyedi, and moderator Marjan Keypour Greenblatt. Lydia Yomtovian Frankel of the IAC opened the session and framed it around the 12-day Israel-Iran war, the rapidly developing protest movement inside Iran, and the strategic choices facing the United States and Israel.
Farzan Seyedi was introduced as a political member of the Iran Novin Party and a long-time supporter of Reza Pahlavi. His role on the panel was distinct from the military and policy perspectives offered by McCormick and Sabti: he focused repeatedly on the political psychology of people inside Iran, the importance of outside support, the information war surrounding the protests, and the question of what could replace the Islamic Republic if the present system collapsed.
When Greenblatt asked Farzan Seyedi how the 12-day war had affected the Iranian government and the Iranian people, he argued that the fighting changed the way many Iranians interpreted the regional balance of power. In his account, protesters had spent decades facing repression while feeling that the outside world was either indifferent or unwilling to confront the institutions responsible for that repression. He said the war altered that perception by showing Iranians that the Islamic Republic's senior military and security infrastructure could be penetrated and targeted.
Farzan Seyedi emphasized a theme that recurred throughout the hour: the difference, in his view, between the Iranian state and the Iranian people. He described a historic relationship between Persians and Jews and argued that many Iranians distinguish sharply between the Islamic Republic's hostility toward Israel and their own attitudes toward Israelis. He portrayed this people-to-people relationship as a strategic asset for a future Iran and as a reason that an Iran-Israel relationship could look dramatically different after political change.
The discussion also moved beyond the immediate protest movement to the issue of transition. During a later exchange, Seyedi highlighted the Iran Prosperity Project and argued that the opposition's planning should be judged not only by its ability to challenge the current regime but by its readiness for the day after. He said Reza Pahlavi and associated experts had discussed transitional planning across economic, military, energy, and governance questions. Farzan Seyedi's central argument was that political change did not have to produce a vacuum and that Iranians should ultimately be free to choose their future political system through a democratic process.
McCormick, meanwhile, focused on American power, sanctions, military deterrence, and the need for sustained pressure on Tehran. Sabti addressed Iranian decision-making, the regime's nuclear and missile programs, public attitudes, and the possibility of another confrontation. Greenblatt repeatedly connected those strategic questions back to the human cost of repression and the challenge of supporting people inside Iran while internet access and reliable reporting were being restricted.
The final minutes of the panel became symbolic as well as political. Greenblatt urged the audience to listen to Iranians and follow the political leadership they themselves were identifying. Frankel then asked the panelists and audience to stand with a flag connected to the protest movement. Farzan Seyedi closed by invoking America, Israel, and Persia together and calling for a future in which Iranians could rejoin the international community on different terms.
The session demonstrated why the Iranian question had become one of the most emotionally and strategically charged topics at the summit. It was not presented simply as a discussion of military strikes or nuclear policy. For Farzan Seyedi, it was equally a discussion about fear, legitimacy, political organization, the media, generational change, and whether a different relationship between Iran, Israel, and the West could emerge after the Islamic Republic.