What Orthodox Judaism Can Teach Americans about Faith in a Fractured Republic

In The Fractured Republic, Yuval Levin has analyzed the various divisive forces in American public life. Among them is the decline of religion (even if only in the form of lip-service identification) as a unifying force—a decline accompanied by, on the one hand, growing hostility to religion and, on the other hand, the rise of vibrant if often isolated communities of the devout. In his review, Meir Soloveichik argues that these latter communities can learn much from the example of Orthodox Jews:

Levin wisely counsels believers in America not only to fight for religious liberty but also to allow their flourishing communities to teach by example. They should offer, he suggests, an alternative moral order that is not only negative but also positive, drawing people’s eyes and hearts “to the vast and beautiful ‘yes’ for the sake of which an occasional narrow but insistent ‘no’ is required.” . . . [In addition], they must learn to balance being both part of and apart from society, confident in the face of a much more secular society and even in the face of Americans who may at times be hostile to their faith.

Levin is undoubtedly correct about the state of American religion, both in diagnosis and prescription, and reading his book has made me more convinced that at this moment, American Orthodox Judaism may have found a unique calling. As Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik has pointed out, religious Jews have always sought to embody Abraham’s identification of himself in the Bible as a ger v’toshav—a stranger and a neighbor, aware of what makes one different while engaging the world and, like Abraham in Canaan, speaking candidly and eloquently about why one is different.

Read more at Commentary

More about: American Judaism, American Religion, Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Orthodoxy, Religion & Holidays

What a Strategic Victory in Gaza Can and Can’t Achieve

On Tuesday, the Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant met in Washington with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. Gallant says that he told the former that only “a decisive victory will bring this war to an end.” Shay Shabtai tries to outline what exactly this would entail, arguing that the IDF can and must attain a “strategic” victory, as opposed to merely a tactical or operational one. Yet even after a such a victory Israelis can’t expect to start beating their rifles into plowshares:

Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy’s ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. . . . This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the Strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. This should lead in the coming years to the stabilization of the Gaza Strip without Hamas control over it.

In such a scenario, it will be possible to ensure relative quiet for a decade or more. However, it will not be possible to ensure quiet beyond that, since the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel. This is what happened in the West Bank after a decade of relative quiet, and in relatively stable Iraq after the withdrawal of the United States at the end of 2011.

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Gaza War 2023, Hamas, IDF