Drawing on the ideas of the French philosopher Pierre Manent, Richard Reinsch II examines why the Jewish state’s battle for survival has provoked such extreme, even unhinged, opposition in the West—from the polite, moralistic condemnations of heads of state to the fury of street protesters.

The proud nation-state [of] Israel represents the opposite lesson of what European humanitarians have drawn from the history of Jews in modern times. Israel has been built by struggle, sacrifice, and pride. The near destruction of the Jewish people by Hitler’s Germany is frequently invoked as the founding impetus for the unifying goals of the European Union. The villain in the EU’s political narrative of unity is the nation, the so-called springboard of naked aggression and warmongering on behalf of the superiority of a people. Brussels promises to bring this to an end with the promise of endless union and unification of peoples.

Israel’s defense of its collective existence could portend not only the defeat of its enemies but also remind a deeply confused and morally troubled West that it cannot hide behind humanity and escape from itself. In a recent lecture in Paris, Manent poignantly offered that a Europe that turns its back on Israel forfeits its soul.

In 2003, the Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, spooked by the American display of might in Iraq, decided to destroy or surrender his entire nuclear program. Informed observers have suggested that the deal he made with the U.S. should serve as a model for any agreement with Iran. Robert Joseph provides some useful background:

Gaddafi had convinced himself that Libya would be next on the U.S. target list after Iraq. There was no reason or need to threaten Libya with bombing as Gaddafi was quick to tell almost every visitor that he did not want to be Saddam Hussein. The images of Saddam being pulled from his spider hole . . . played on his mind.

President Bush’s goal was to have Libya serve as an alternative model to Iraq. Instead of war, proliferators would give up their nuclear programs in exchange for relief from economic and political sanctions.

Any outcome that permits Iran to enrich uranium at any level will fail the one standard that President Trump has established: Iran will not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. Limiting enrichment even to low levels will allow Iran to break out of the agreement at any time, no matter what the agreement says.

Iran is not a normal government that observes the rules of international behavior or fair “dealmaking.” This is a regime that relies on regional terror and brutal repression of its citizens to stay in power. It has a long history of using negotiations to expand its nuclear program. Its negotiating tactics are clear: extend the negotiations as long as possible and meet any concession with more demands.