I hate linking to the Guardian, a British newspaper whose coverage of Israel makes its American counterparts seem fair-minded, but this story, by Dalya Alberge, was too interesting to pass up:

A bestselling author is seeking to restore the reputation of a wronged Jewish scientist, who saved millions of lives by creating the world’s first vaccines against the bubonic plague and cholera—only to fall victim to anti-Semitism and to be almost air-brushed from history since his death in 1930.

In dramas planned for the stage and screen, Paul Twivy will pay tribute to the extraordinary achievements of Waldemar Haffkine, a pioneering microbiologist recognized by the scientist, Joseph Lister, as a savior of humanity—but who was brought down by racist doctors within the British Raj while he was working in India.

Evidence was falsified in a legal case from which he never recovered. He returned to Britain and, even after he was exonerated, he was not allowed to resume his former job.

Yesterday I saw an unconfirmed report that the Biden administration has offered Israel a massive arms deal in exchange for a promise not to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. Even if the report is incorrect, there is plenty of other evidence that the White House has been trying to dissuade Jerusalem from mounting such an attack. The thinking behind this pressure is hard to fathom, as there is little Israel could do that would better serve American interests in the Middle East than putting some distance between the ayatollahs and nuclear weapons. Aaron MacLean explains why this is so, in the context of a broader discussion of strategic priorities in the Middle East and elsewhere:

If the Iran issue were satisfactorily adjusted in the direction of the American interest, the question of Israel’s security would become more manageable overnight. If a network of American partners enjoyed security against state predation, the proactive suppression of militarily less serious threats like Islamic State would be more easily organized—and indeed, such partners would be less vulnerable to the manipulation of powers external to the region.

[The Biden administration’s] commitment to escalation avoidance has had the odd effect of making the security situation in the region look a great deal as it would if America had actually withdrawn [from the Middle East].

Alternatively, we could project competence by effectively backing our Middle East partners in their competitions against their enemies, who are also our enemies, by ensuring a favorable overall balance of power in the region by means of our partnership network, and by preventing Iran from achieving nuclear status—even if it courts escalation with Iran in the shorter run.