According to the Islamic Republic’s official line—frequently repeated by credulous Western journalists—the country’s small Jewish community enjoys toleration and good treatment so long as its members renounce Zionism and denounce Israel. The reality is very different, as Majid Rafizadeh discovered when, teaching at a university in his native Iran, he delivered a lecture to his students about the Holocaust in violation of the ban on discussing the subject in the classroom. He discovered afterward that one of his students, the first Jew he had ever met, had relatives who were killed in the Shoah:

I soon came to understand the reason [this student] felt the need to keep [her identity] hidden. . . . First, there are systematic and concerted efforts made from the top down by the theocratic regime and several other governments in the region to eliminate Jewish history. There is also a strong push to incite antagonism against the Jewish people. The regime openly encourages debates that revolve around casting doubt on, and questioning the [historicity] of, the Holocaust. It ratchets up anti-Israel slogans and celebrates national anti-Israel holidays such as Quds Day. . . .

One reason behind [the anti-Semitic attitudes] of Iran’s theocratic establishment is that the roots of Jews in Iran date back to a pre-Islamic era, an era that the Iranian government attempts to de-emphasize or erase from the memory of the society. Another reason is rooted in the notion that for the Iranian regime, Jews and Israel are mingled in one category; if you are Jewish, the thinking goes, then you are an Israeli. Since the Iranian regime is opposed to Israel’s existence, Iranian authorities view the Jewish people through the prism of suspicion. They are viewed as Israeli allies, conspirators, and loyalists to Israel and the United States, not to the Iranian government.

Some Jews secretly confess that they are indeed living two separate lives. In their private life they practice their faith, but in public they are extremely cautious, avoiding saying anything [that might identify them as Jews]. Out of fear or in order to survive economically, socially, and academically, some may convert to Islam on the surface but continue to practice Judaism at home. Some have two names, one Muslim, one Jewish.

[Nonetheless], in order to enhance its global legitimacy, . . . the Iranian regime has boasted about [its supposed] tolerance, and pointed to the fact that there are Jews in Iran as a sign that the regime is cosmopolitan and civil. Depending on the circumstance, the Jewish community may be paraded past foreign governments as an example of progress, or trampled down by the Iranian regime as a toxic presence.

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.