Evangelical Christians, Israel, and the Jews

Dec. 26 2017

Revisiting his 2013 essay in Mosaic, Robert Nicholson explains why the land of Israel is important to evangelical Christians like himself, how this attachment translates into friendship with the Jewish state, why Jews—and especially the non-Orthodox—are skeptical of, or even hostile to, evangelical support, and the danger of a younger generation of evangelicals moving away from the pro-Israel stance of their elders. He also discusses the effects of Donald Trump’s presidency on existing divides within the evangelical community and his own thoughts on American recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. (Interview by Eric Cohen. Audio, 38 minutes. Options for streaming and download are available at the link below.)

You have 2 free articles left this month

Sign up now for unlimited access

Subscribe Now

Read more at Tikvah

More about: Christian Zionism, Donald Trump, Evangelical Christianity, Israel & Zionism, Jerusalem, Jewish-Christian relations

The Dangers of Diplomacy with Iran

Aug. 21 2018

Although President Trump’s offer to meet with President Rouhani of the Islamic Republic was rejected, the possibility of direct negotiations remains. Ray Takeyh and Mark Dubowitz warn that Tehran could use talks to stall and gain leverage over Washington:

The mullahs understand that just by staying at the table, Americans usually offer up concessions. [They] are betting that the Trump administration may become weaker over time, preoccupied with domestic politics. Best to entangle America in protracted diplomacy while awaiting what the regime expects will be midterm Republican losses in Congress and the return of a more flexible Democratic president to power in 2021. This is what [Supreme Leader Ali] Khamenei probably meant when he stressed that negotiations have to wait until America is softened up.

Diplomacy would surely blunt the impact of U.S. pressure. The mullahs believe they can undermine the escalation of [U.S.] sanctions by being diplomatically flirtatious and know well that America seldom disrupts negotiations with military action. Indeed, as a prelude to the talks, Iran may even resume its nuclear activities to frighten the Europeans and gain leverage by putting even more pressure on Washington to adjust its red lines.

Should negotiations begin, the Trump team should take sensible precautions to avoid the predicament of the Obama negotiators. The administration will need to maintain its maximum-pressure campaign and its negotiating demands. . . . Any negotiations with the Islamic Republic should be time-limited, and Washington must be prepared to leave the table when it confronts the usual pattern of regime bombast and mendacity.

Donald Trump should insist on direct talks with the supreme leader, as he did with North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un: Rouhani is a lame duck without any real influence. The administration also should demand that Europeans join its sanctions policy targeting Iran’s ballistic-missile program, support for terrorism, and human-rights abuses as a price for their participation in the talks.

You have 1 free article left this month

Sign up now for unlimited access

Subscribe Now

Read more at New York Post

More about: Ali Khamenei, Donald Trump, Hassan Rouhani, Iran, U.S. Foreign policy