The phrase “non-observant Orthodox” was commonplace in American Jewish circles in the mid-20th century, when it described a significant share of the Jewish population. If it has fallen into disuse, that is because, Zev Eleff writes, the type has largely vanished from the American scene:

Decades ago, . . . it was well-known that Orthodox life and Jewish law could be decoupled, no philosophical apologetics needed. This sort of sociological separation yielded a variegated Orthodox profile. . . . The non-observant Orthodox Jew emerged as an indispensable member of the Orthodox community, supporting its institutions and preempting those who would have preferred more rigid definitions for Orthodox Jews. True, the non-observant Orthodox Jew was by and large removed from Orthodox Judaism’s inner circle, but was also far from being an “outsider” in this community. . . .

Halakhah was not an all-or-nothing arrangement for this group of self-described Orthodox Jews. On the one hand, [they] made no claim that they abided by all the strictures of halakhah (although they did feel that the rabbi ought to sport an unimpeachable record). On the other hand, these laymen contended that this did not disqualify them from the ranks of the Orthodox. Certainly, they did not agree with the theological points of view of the Reform and Conservative rabbis who preached from pulpits and filled editorial columns in the Jewish press. [Yet] they did not frequent the synagogue all that often, behavior that was more closely in line with the non-Orthodox rank-and-file. But when they did make it, say, to recite kaddish or for a bar mitzvah, their choice was invariably the Orthodox variety. . . .

The more homogeneous character of the Orthodox community [that has emerged more recently] has . . . contributed to an increasing sense of rigidity. . . . Orthodox leaders have tended in the past few decades to pay more attention to what ought to count as “Orthodox” and to patrol community borders [more strictly]. The “non-observant Orthodox Jew” has been eliminated from the lexicon.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.