In the wake of Donald Trump’s election, Reform and Conservative synagogues across the U.S. have experienced a spike in attendance as rabbis long committed to identifying Judaism with “social justice” have explicitly or implicitly aligned themselves with the so-called anti-Trump resistance. Jonathan Tobin argues that, as much as this political engagement seems like a successful strategy for congregations faced with declining memberships, it brings no more than a Pyrrhic victory:

One can make reasonable arguments that some elements of Jewish law buttress modern political liberalism. . . . But once synagogues are dedicated to making religion serve partisan ends, it is always faith that gets the short end of the stick.

While the Torah and Jewish peoplehood are eternal concepts, the anti-Trump resistance will come and go no matter who ultimately wins the struggle between the president and his critics. Millennials searching for meaning may find a momentary haven in “sanctuary synagogues,” but, like previous attempts to sell Jewish institutions to secular audiences, the idea that one can be a “green” Jew or one rooted in any other trendy topic is not one that is likely to survive in the long run.

Yet an even more serious drawback to infusing partisanship into Jewish life is that rather than drawing Jews together, this is something that will only push them further apart. It is bad enough that in our bifurcated society driven by social media, we can delete and defriend anyone whose views don’t conform to our pre-existing beliefs and prejudices. Once synagogues take the leap into open political activity—and the “Trump bump” means the line between apolitical social justice and the partisan “resistance” is being erased by some liberal rabbis—they are, in effect, declaring those who don’t agree with these views personae non gratae in the sanctuary.

Yesterday, the Iranian foreign minister flew to Geneva to meet with European diplomats. President Trump, meanwhile, indicated that cease-fire negotiations might soon begin with Iran, which would presumably involve Tehran agreeing to make concessions regarding its nuclear program, while Washington pressures Israel to halt its military activities. According to Israeli media, Iran already began putting out feelers to the U.S. earlier this week. Aviram Bellaishe considers the purpose of these overtures:

The regime’s request to return to negotiations stems from the principle of deception and delay that has guided it for decades. Iran wants to extricate itself from a situation of total destruction of its nuclear facilities. It understands that to save the nuclear program, it must stop at a point that would allow it to return to it in the shortest possible time. So long as the negotiation process leads to halting strikes on its military capabilities and preventing the destruction of the nuclear program, and enables the transfer of enriched uranium to a safe location, it can simultaneously create the two tracks in which it specializes—a false facade of negotiations alongside a hidden nuclear race.