The term postmodernism refers loosely to the ideas of various thinkers of the second half of the 20th century who critically interrogated the philosophical foundations of modernity. Included in this group are Jews such as Jacques Derrida and Emmanuel Levinas; the latter, in fact, received a traditional education and wrote works about the Talmud. But postmodernity also refers to a description of the present era. Thus, Miriam Feldmann-Kaye contends, even those who reject various arguments advanced by postmodern writers must contend with how Judaism can answer the questions they raise. In conversation with J.J. Kimche, she explores what these problems are, and how some postmodern ideas can be fruitfully applied to Jewish texts, citing the example of such thinkers as Rabbi Shimon Gershon Rosenberg. Feldmann-Kaye and Kimche conclude by discussing the thought of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, who rejected postmodernism while sharing its criticism of the Enlightenment.

If Iran succeeds in obtaining nuclear weapons, the war in Gaza, let alone the protests on college campuses, will seem like a minor complication. Jonathan Schachter fears that this danger could be much more imminent than decisionmakers in Jerusalem and Washington believe. In his view, Israel seems to be repeating the mistake that allowed it to be taken by surprise on Simchat Torah of 2023 and Yom Kippur of 1973: putting too much faith in an intelligence concept that could be wrong.

Israel and the United States apparently believe that despite Iran’s well-documented progress in developing capabilities necessary for producing and delivering nuclear weapons, as well as its extensive and ongoing record of violating its international nuclear obligations, there is no acute crisis because building a bomb would take time, would be observable, and could be stopped by force. Taken together, these assumptions and their moderating impact on Israeli and American policy form a new Iran concept reminiscent of its 1973 namesake and of the systemic failures that preceded the October 7 massacre.

Meanwhile, most of the restrictions put in place by the 2015 nuclear deal will expire by the end of next year, rendering the question of Iran’s adherence moot. And the forces that could be taking action aren’t:

The European Union regularly issues boilerplate press releases asserting its members’ “grave concern.” American decisionmakers and spokespeople have created the unmistakable impression that their reservations about the use of force are stronger than their commitment to use force to prevent an Iranian atomic bomb. At the same time, the U.S. refuses to enforce its own sanctions comprehensively: Iranian oil exports (especially to China) and foreign-currency reserves have ballooned since January 2021, when the Biden administration took office.

Israel’s response has also been sluggish and ambiguous. Despite its oft-stated policy of never allowing a nuclear Iran, Israel’s words and deeds have sent mixed messages to allies and adversaries—perhaps inadvertently reinforcing the prevailing sense in Washington and elsewhere that Iran’s nuclear efforts do not present an exigent crisis.