Founded by an act of Congress in 1998, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCRIF) makes policy recommendations to the president and State Department about how to help those suffering religious persecution across the globe. One of its nine commissioners recently resigned to protest possible congressional efforts to reform it that would leave it bureaucratically hamstrung. Clifford May, himself a former commissioner, explains why he believes the proposed changes to be wrongheaded:

Some members of Congress disapprove of USCIRF. They object to its prioritization of “freedom of religion or belief”—which I regard as the most foundational right, the right upon which all others are built—over what they consider most important: expanding rights for select grievance communities (for want of a better term).

With that in mind, they are proposing to expand USCRIF’s remit to include opposition to “abuse of religion to justify human-rights violations.” Think about that: if a Christian baker declines to design wedding cakes for same-sex couples, is that abuse of religion? Is male circumcision a human-rights violation justified by abuse of Judaism and Islam?

I think commissioners should avoid such theological questions to the extent possible. They should focus instead on the plight of Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang, Buddhists in Tibet, Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan, Baha’i in Iran, Yazidis in Iraq, and Christians in Syria, Egypt, and many other lands. On such issues, USCIRF commissioners, Democratic and Republican, can find consensus.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.