American Jewry on the Defensive

After examining the current situation in Israel, John Podhoretz turns to the increasing threats to the Jews of the United States, so many of which seem to have been incubated in the universities:

Many of us developed real concern about college activism against Israel in the 2010s—in part because there was a youth-movement president who was hostile to Israel and it seemed like he and his young acolytes might actually come together to dig a moat between the Jewish state and the only country on earth that was its reliable ally.

First, and least noted, was that the powers-that-be in higher ed were following the unwritten rule in place since the assaults on them during the 1960s—which is that you’re supposed to humor, cater to, and pat the heads of leftist agitators when they do their thing, whatever that thing is. To be sure, many of these people are in agreement with the agitators, since that’s what they once were, too, back in the day.

The very fact that the [college] presidents who sat before Congress felt so little pressure internally or emotionally to say something when Israel and Jews came under attack after October 7, and showed themselves to be unsympathetic at best and heartless at worst when they did speak, is testimony to how unimportant the feelings or concerns of Jews are within the sociological landscapes they tend.

Read more at Commentary

More about: American Jewry, Anti-Semitism, Israel on campus, University

Israel Just Sent Iran a Clear Message

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.

Read more at Jewish Chronicle

More about: Iran, Israeli Security