Category: Middle East

Did the world learn anything from the Holocaust? Did its victims and their progeny? These are questions that have been raised about the

In both the Holocaust and in the treatment of Palestinians by Zionist Jews, we see similar factors at play—fear, which justifies attack, desensitization to violence, the rise to authority of elements which in the past were seen as beyond the pale, extremist elements which in the past were disparaged.

The Jewish philosopher Martin Buber wrote of the I-thou relationship as being a binding of soul to soul, a deep and personal intimacy. He contrasted that with the I-it relationship, where the Other is dehumanized—the Jew in Nazi Germany, the Palestinian in Israel/Palestine.

Nazi ideology identified whole categories of people as untermenschen. Jews were characterized as rich capitalists bleeding the German people and simultaneously as Communists threatening the stability of society.

Anti-Arab prejudice is widespread in Israel. Palestinians are seen as threatening, wanting to drive the Jews into the sea. They are seen as bloodthirsty and primitive. “Us or them.”

In the Holocaust, beginnings resembled the lynch mob atmosphere—Kristallnacht. Then things settled down again, but the discrimination and eventually the atrocities grew, with the leadership of the society carrying on what had previously been mass behavior in a now formal program. This picture omits the conflict between the new Nazi élite and the old conservative Junker élite, but that left the Junkers deprived of their status.

The situation in Israel/Palestine involves a Zionist Jewish tough-guy self-image.

Zionists talk of the New Jew, no longer subservient. The New Jew is aggressive. Most likely, he is blond and blue-eyed.

There are two sides to the New Jew, the Jewish knight and warrior. On the one hand, there is the principle that he fights according to all the rules—Purity of Arms.

On the other, there are incidents in which the unsavory element commits unspeakable acts—Deir Yassin and the murder of Count Folke Bernadotte, for example. But these acts are, it is argued, acts of the uncouth—Irgun and the Stern Gang.

Now, however, the former leaders of these formations and members of their political party offspring are in charge of the country.

The Palestinians are untermenschen, whose homes can be stolen (as in Jerusalem) or destroyed (in the Occupied Territories).

The anti-Palestinian depredations of fanatical young settlers are semi-restrained by authorities, but on the other hand the Israeli government has secretly and illegally funded the proliferation of settlements that even it describes as illegal.

The depredations include attacks on children going to school, attacks on farmers and destruction of their olive trees, theft of farm animals and other property, etc.

Is there a difference between the Nazis and the Israelis? To pose the question is to answer it. There is a considerable difference.

While Palestinians have been robbed, ghettoized, and mistreated, the magnitude of the Holocaust has certainly not been replicated. And while virtually the entire political and social structure in Nazi Germany engaged in the effort to destroy the Jews, the situation in Israel is not remotely similar.

The ideology of “Purity of Arms” has had a certain hold. Thus, some Israeli soldiers who served in Operation Cast Lead in Gaza became involved in an organization, Breaking the Silence, which issued a booklet detailing the inhumane nature of that military campaign—shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later examples of senseless killings induced by a combination of fear and excitement, use of human shields, reports of rabbis to the troops demonizing all Palestinians, use of white phosphorus.

In Germany, a few brave churchmen stood up against Hitler. In Israel, opposition to repression of the Palestinians is more significant. Even the children of former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert have resisted the racist onslaught. One of his sons refused military service in the Territories and left the country. Another son left before entering the military. A daughter takes part in pro-Palestinian demonstrations.

Bottom line: We all need to avoid the I-it syndrome. We need to be the one voice in the crowd that says no.

We need to refuse to abandon our humanity because of fear, and we need to look beyond the fear to the reality.

We need to say no to the new Holocaust against the Palestinians by Zionist Jews in Israel/Palestine.

Any news browser you log on or any newspaper you turn, all you see is Muslims around the world are being killed in such a large number and so often that we do not even bother stop and think. We have long stopped counting the bodies as if it an insignificant norm. They are just animals at slaughterhouse. Only time human deaths make big splashing news and arouse big outcry is the non-Muslims death. As if, certain human lives are more precious than others.

When 21-century history in general and Muslims history in particular is being written in blood, there is vast conspiracy going around the world against Muslims and Islam. People who are hiding behind the charade of democracy and freedom are constantly propagating to demonize Islam and Muslims. Whether the Wilders from Netherland are threatened by insignificant Muslims minority in Netherlands;Dutch anti-Islam politician creates stir in UK or it is every other internet posting which is full of hatred and intolerance towards Muslims. Wilder wants the complete assimilation of Muslims in Duch Christian’s society. He declares that Muslims are not welcome in Netherlands if they do not leave their way of life, which is Islamic way of life. He knows very well by his hate speeches and motive he is not winning Muslim hearts. He knows very well that he is encouraging the extremist forces on all sides and to be truthful that is what his goal is. If Wilders of our times are sincere and have some courage then they should take the right action, put a total ban on immigration and stop buying oil from them, but don’t attack their harmless ritual of five times a day prayers. Islam is the only religion, which is still trying to preserve its true self, its moral values unlike other religions. This is a tragedy of our Modern times where Western powers want every human being in every corner of the world cloned in their mirror image. Their motto is; western values should be adhered by all.

One would think world powers came to realization after hundreds of years of bloody wars and exploitative era of colonialism, where they annihilated many of great cultures and civilizations of the world. One would think we have come to conclusion that diversity is the key for the vibrancy of life and Universe. We need to work towards preservation of diversities and multi culturalism. Alas! That is proved not to be true. Western powers are still in a constant war to assimilate the whole world in their image. If any body objects, they are against freedom and democracy.

Having said that we cannot afford to overlook the flaws of Muslims societies. Whether it is poverty, lack of education, lack of representation in the governance, lack political sovereignty in some parts of the world, and of course every ones favorite Muslim women’s emancipation. These are the key issue, which needed to be resolved through reformation not wars. These reforms have to come from within the Muslim society.
The resolution for all these conflicts lies in education, which can be promoted through pen not drone.

About 5,000 left-wing activists and Palestinians gathered Saturday to protest the eviction of four Palestinian families in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem.

Protesters carried Palestinian flags and chanted “Stop the destruction of homes” and “There is no sanctity in an occupied city.”

Despite the heavy police presence, the demonstration has remained peaceful.

For the past six months, a group of independent left-wing activists have demonstrated every Friday in the East Jerusalem neighborhood, protesting the takeover of Palestinian homes by groups of Israeli settlers.

Last week, the demonstrators asked Jerusalem police for permission to hold a large rally in the street leading to a contested house, to protest against the settlers and show solidarity with the Palestinian residents of the neighborhood.

The police refused to authorize the rally and instead approved a much smaller gathering at a soccer field situated 300 meters from the home. The demonstrators said that the field is surrounded by a wall, it cannot be seen from the outside and is entirely cut off from the area near the contested home, which is the main focus of the protest.

Supreme Court justices were highly critical of the Jerusalem police decision this week after they refused the request by demonstrators.

“The police are taking the right to demonstrate 30 years backward,” Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch said during deliberations.

The justices ruled that 300 demonstrators would be allowed to approach the contested house at the conclusion of the rally.

Jerusalem District police commander, Aharon Franko, was asked to appear before the justices and said that the the contested house is in “one of the most explosive locations.” He explained that “not a day goes by when there are not confrontations, fighting and stone throwing.”

Police said that closing off the street, as the demonstrators would like, would make it difficult for worshippers to make their way to the nearby tomb of Simon the Just (Shimon HaTzadik).

At the start of Saturday’s rally, Palestinian director and playwright Samih Jabarin criticized demonstrators who arrived at the rally carrying Israeli flags with the word “peace” on them, saying the only solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one bi-national state.

However, one of the rally’s organizers said, “It is important to clarify that we have people of all stripes here, supporters of a bi-national state and supporters of two states for two peoples. But we are all united against the ‘Judaization’ of East Jerusalem.

The Palestinians, who want to make East Jerusalem the capital of a future state, say the property belongs to them.

Some 200 right wing activists held a counter demonstration nearby, although police managed to keep the peace between the two groups of protesters, Israel Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said.

Earlier Saturday, three men were injured in clashes between Palestinians and Israeli soldiers in the northern West Bank village of Burin.

The clashes erupted when soldiers stopped a group of Palestinians trying to approach a Jewish settlement, an Israeli military spokeswoman said.

Palestinians residents said the settlers were trying to bathe in a water cistern in their village.

Palestinians hurled rocks at the soldiers who responded with tear gas and rubber-coated steel pellets.

Tensions have been high in the West Bank since Israel declared last month it would add two contested shrines there to its national heritage list.
To read more click below…
Thousands of protesters rally against Jewish presence in E. Jerusalem

Clashes between Israeli police and Palestinian protestors over the issue of holy sites have provoked a wave of condemnation in the Arab press for Israel’s behaviour.

On Sunday several Palestinians were arrested after Israeli security forces entered the Temple Mount in East Jerusalem. The incident followed clashes in the West Bank town of Hebron on Friday over Israel’s decision to list two disputed shrines as heritage sites.

The Palestinian press painted Israel’s actions as a deliberate attempt to escalate conflict in the region. Newspapers in the Middle East condemned what was perceived as a concerted effort to oppress Islamic identity and set back the peace process.

In Israel, one editorial acknowledged that the decision to list the disputed shrines may have been a “tactical mistake”, while another commentator attacked the US response to the issue.

To read more click below…
ME anger at Israeli ‘escalations’

LONDON – A filmmaker, anthropologist and economic researcher are among those headlining events marking what pro-Palestinian organizers have declared as “Israeli Apartheid Week” – and all three speakers are Israeli.

University campuses in more than 40 cities around the world are marking the week with lectures, films, multimedia events, cultural performances and demonstrations.

Since they were first launched in 2005, the events have become some of “the most important global events in the Palestine solidarity calendar,” according to its organizers.
Its aim, they state on their Web site, is to “contribute to this chorus of international opposition to Israeli apartheid and to bolster support for the boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS) campaign.”

Though many of the details about those events were not being promoted on the Apartheid Week Web site, it did list several events being offered by Israelis.

Among them is Shir Hever, an economic researcher at the Alternative Information Center in Jerusalem, who is scheduled to give a series of lectures at the University of Amsterdam entitled “Could the Economic Policies of Israel be Considered a Form of Apartheid?”

In addition, Israeli activist and filmmaker Shai Carmeli-Pollak is screening his 2006 documentary “Bil’in Habibti,” about Israel Defense Forces violence, at Boston-area universities.

Jeff Halper, the Israel-based professor of anthropology who is co-founder and coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, was scheduled to speak on “Israeli Apartheid: The Case For BDS” at Glasgow University.

To read more click below…
Universities across the globe mark Israeli Apartheid Week

Moshe Dayan’s widow: Israel doesn’t know how to make peace
By Gideon Levy

She turned 93 last Friday, according to the Hebrew calendar. On Thursday, Herzliya awarded her honorary citizenship. Ruth Dayan doesn’t rest for a moment. In the Bedouin town of Segev Shalom and in the Palestinian village of Kharbata, she founded an arts and crafts workshop for women. Once every week or two she drives to these places by herself. She’s also busy with countless humanitarian issues in the territories. A few months ago she flew to Malta to meet the daughter of Yasser Arafat, the granddaughter of her soulmate, Raymonda Tawil.

During the interview her son, the filmmaker Assi Dayan, emerges from his room in Ruth’s apartment in north Tel Aviv. She sends him off to rest some more. The day before the interview, Maariv published a heartrending poem written by her. She greatly admires the book “The End of Conflict” by Avinadav Begin, the grandson of the former prime minister, and she is busy helping her biographer, Anthony David, get on with the job. (David also wrote a biography of Salman Schocken, who bought Haaretz back in the 1930s.)

She shows me the first picture ever taken of her; she’s a baby in her mother’s arms. On the back of the fading photo is scribbled: “Ruth. Three months. 1917.”
Advertisement
Ruth Dayan, are you proud to be an Israeli? Are you ashamed?

It depends. I’m proud to be an Israeli on a limited basis. Every person has his own inner Israeli.

What is your Israel?

My Israel is the country, the landscape I see when I travel from north to south. The mountains, the ocean – just like it was back then. For a moment I even enjoy myself. I remember when we would pick anemones of various colors in the hills that surround Nahalal. I’m from Jerusalem, and there they had red anemones. I miss the old Israel, when there were still ideals, when we settled the land.

And we expelled?

We didn’t expel. During my childhood, we didn’t expel. We bought those tracts of land. Since then, however, many things have happened and today Israel is not the same. It’s cliche to talk about how we’re in a state of occupation and we’re trying to occupy more and more. I’m at that age where I don’t even talk about peace anymore. We don’t know how to make peace. We go from war to war and this will never end.

Whose fault is it?

Ours, mainly. Are we, with all our power, incapable of taking a step?

Moshe Dayan was there when this occupation started.

No. The occupation was the only remaining option. Nothing else could have been done. Moshe was the one who actually led the policy of building bridges.

Perhaps this perpetuated the occupation?

That could be. I don’t think it did. Even Arafat, the man who would kiss me when we met, told me he admired Moshe. Even the Jordanian chief of staff told me in 1948: “What a pleasure it is having your husband as an enemy.” His behavior toward the Arabs was positive even after the Six-Day War. He would travel alone to Nablus; he liked being with them. He had a dialogue with them. Today, who talks with them? For the current government, peace is just a word.

Have you lost hope for peace?

I think Zionism has finished its work. I’ve endured many wars and I can’t ignore the fact that they didn’t want us. When I go to the territories, I don’t even bother instilling hope in them. Out of courtesy, I tell them that I hope something will change, but the deterioration is just awful. Particularly the fence. This is something I can’t tolerate.

People say it stopped terrorism.

Oh, please. “It stopped terrorism.” Nothing will be able to stop terrorism except dialogue.

Shimon Peres admired Dayan. What was Dayan’s attitude toward Peres?

Moshe didn’t admire anybody. Maybe Ben-Gurion. He was a lone wolf.

What is Peres’ contribution to peace?

I think he can still contribute a lot. Though a president doesn’t have to intervene, he must intervene. He must make an impact, even on the people. The people are dispersed across a number of different viewpoints and groups and even religions within our religion. My grandfather graduated from the Sorbonne, my mother was a secular woman, and it’s not like I hear anybody speaking to me from behind the clouds.

Are you Jewish?

I’m just an Israeli. It was a great honor to be Israeli, even when I was still a Jewish Palestinian during my childhood in London. I’m the first daughter of graduates of the Herzliya Gymnasium after Yehudi Menuhin was the first son. In London, I went to pray with the gentile girls.

What did you think would be here?

We lived the moment. In Nahalal, 17 children were killed during the War of Independence. We only thought about today and nothing else.

Two states or one?

There was a time when I thought one state for two peoples. Now I see that we have to have two states because we really are different and it would be best if everyone takes care of his own business. We’re a mob that can’t even get along internally. So we’re going to get along with them?

Is there a politician you admire today who sparks hope in you?

Avishay [Braverman, a Labor MK and minority affairs minister]. No one is like him. I was impressed by his work at Ben-Gurion University. He can very well be prime minister, and he wants to be.

What would you do if you were prime minister?

Just like how we started. Like when we met with [Jordanian King] Abdullah and when [Yitzhak] Rabin tried. Rabin could have delivered peace.

So far only Likud has made peace.

Let’s have Likud. Let’s have whoever. Currently I’m in a trance from Avinadav Begin. He says that there are no Jews, there are no Muslims. This is the foundation. This I really like. The more I read this book, the more floored I am. He is very Beginesque, just like his father and grandfather. He believes in something. He doesn’t go to Bil’in just to be seen there. He goes there because he believes in it.

I want to read you a passage from his book: “Do we need words to observe the developing buds, to observe our children, to observe the droplets of dew that sparkle in the morning sun? How are we to love if the word love is nothing but a tool used to tighten our grip on our most dear?”

Moshe Dayan always used to say I was a romantic. In letters he wrote to me from prison, he always wrote that one day we would reach a state of tranquillity and that I would sit nearby and knit for him. And I would wear my Scottish kilt. People always used to say I was an extreme leftist, but I love this country.

To read more, click here
Moshe Dayan’s widow: Israel doesn’t know how to make peace

Israel Air force trains for rapid refueling In preparing for Iran Strike
Exclusive: Long-range destinations such as Iran would necessitate risky procedure.

In preparation for long-range missions and possible conflict with Iran, the Israel Air Force has expanded its training programs to include rapid refueling operations on runways.It’s a dangerous practice since the aircraft’s engines are running while the fuel nozzle is still connected to the jets. The training is for both pilots and ground crews and it is being done to enable the aircraft to carry as muchfuel as possible for long-range missions.

Fuel nozzles are traditionally disconnected from fighter aircraft while they are still parked in hangers and before they are rolled out to the runway, where they usually wait for several minutes before takeoff and while burningfuel. The new protocol includes keeping fuel trucks on the runway, having ground personnel reattach the nozzle and fuel the aircraft to the maximum fullness, disconnecting seconds before takeoff.

“We understand that many of our threats and challenges require us to develop a long-range capability,” one senior IAF officer explained. “Part of our preparation includes knowing how tofuel our aircraft so they can have as much fuel as possible.”

Last week, the IAF inaugurated a new unmanned aerial vehicle called the Heron TP. With the same wingspan as a Boeing 737, the Heron TP is Israel’s largest and most sophisticated drone, weighing 4,650 kg. and capable of flying for 36 hours while carrying a payload of hundreds of kilograms. The Heron will increase the IAF’s long-range capabilities, mainly in intelligence and surveillance, and according to foreign reports could also have missile strike capabilities.

Meanwhile on Saturday, The New York Times reported that Iran recently moved almost its entire stockpile of low-enriched uranium to an above-ground facility. According to a recent report by the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, close to two tons of low-enriched nuclear uranium was moved all at once from storage deep underground to a facility where it can be enriched to a 20-percent level, putting the material just a jump away from the 80-to-90% that is required for nuclear weapons.

Iran’s action, which according to the report has confused Western officials, exposes the material to an air strike or even to ground-based sabotage.

The Times quoted one official as saying the move was tantamount to painting a bull’s-eye on the stockpile.

The paper raised several possible explanations, primarily that Iran might have run out of suitable storage containers for the radioactive material and was forced to move it all at once. It would, however, not require the entire two tons to enrich uranium for the aging reactor in Teheran where it makes medical isotopes.

Other explanations raised by the paper include the possibility that the Islamic Republic actually wants Israel to attack, since that would likely unite the Iranian people behind the regime and silence the opposition Green Movement and the demonstrations protesting against the results of June’s presidential election.

Teheran, the Times said, might be using the move as leverage against the West and as part of a threat to further enrich its entire stockpile if the international community did not reduce its pressure on the Islamic Republic.

To read more, click here
IAF trains for rapid refueling

Zvi Bar’el / Let’s calm down on Syria and Hezbollah
By Zvi Bar’el, Haaretz Correspondent

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has visited Syria four times, twice during the past year. Bashar Assad has visited Tehran four times since Ahmadinejad came to power in 2005. If reciprocal visits by the presidents of Iran and Syria are cause for panic, let’s calm down: the balance between the two has been preserved. Hamas leader Khaled Meshal has also visited Tehran many times, most recently in December, so his meeting with Ahmadinejad last week is not unusual. If Syria, Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas are planning a war against Israel, they don’t need showcase meetings. But why not panic when you can panic? Why not see every meeting as a threat?

“Winds of war” was the headline Israeli newspapers used to describe these meetings, even though the Israel Defense Forces’ intelligence assessment was that no preparations are being made for war. All we need to get that pleasant war sensation is the arrival to the region of the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, or for Hassan Nasrallah to give one of his speeches about Tel Aviv, or for a Christian Lebanese politician to charge for the 100th time that Hezbollah seeks to draw Lebanon into a war, or for Ahmadinejad to return to Damascus and for the umpteenth time say the Zionist entity will disappear. Could anything be clearer proof that we are being pushed toward war, or at least that “something is happening”?

On the face of it, each of the leaders meeting in Damascus last week has his reason for war with Israel. Israel, too, has a reason to go to war against each of them, as a group or individually. But a reason for war is insufficient for war. The fact is, Israel is not going to war against Hezbollah, and Syria is not moving its tanks into the Golan Heights. Armed groups like Hamas and Hezbollah consider the menace they pose a strategic asset – not only against Israel.
Advertisement
Hezbollah is basing its control over Lebanon on that menace, but it realizes that war may destroy its political legitimacy. Hamas, cut off from Egypt and the West Bank, cannot allow itself to suffer a Cast Lead II while it is still trying to recover from the effects of Cast Lead I. Syria can attack Israel, but the price it will have to pay is likely to be much higher than what Hamas or Hezbollah will have to pay.

Moreover, Iran is not very keen for its allies to suffer a severe blow whose political implications will echo clearly in Tehran. As far as Iran is concerned, the threat of war is preferable to actual war. The balance of terror is its most effective restraint against an Israeli attack – a view shared by Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas.

This balance can only be overturned by a peace agreement between Syria and Israel. It will not prevent Iran from going nuclear and will not sever the ties between Syria and Iran or Hezbollah. But it will remove an essential element from this four-pronged threat.

However, it appears that we get along much better with threats than wars or real “operations.” We’re thrilled when Assad ridicules U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s demand that he distance himself from Iran; proof that the axis of evil exists and the threat is alive and kicking. But when Assad repeatedly calls for the resumption of indirect negotiations with Israel, the list of preconditions is ready: The Golan Heights will not be returned, we will not agree to Turkish mediation, and we demand the dismantling of the Syria-Iran alliance.

When the United States tries to convince us that the talks with the Palestinians may weaken Iran’s influence in the region – regardless of whether this assessment is valid – we create new areas of friction with the Palestinians. There is little left of the freeze in settlement construction, and declaring the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb national heritage sites may lead to a third intifada. The fact that Hamas has not fired Qassam rockets for more than a year is perceived as obvious, but the blockade of the Gaza Strip has continued for more than three and a half years. In Israel’s eyes this is something natural that should have no effect on the Palestinians’ positions.

Israel cannot honestly talk about external threats when it does not pose an alternative to the public. President Shimon Peres may extend his hand of peace to Syria, but the Israeli government extends its finger in a lewd gesture.

To read more, click here
Let’s calm down on Syria and Hezbollah

If sanctions on Iran haven’t worked, why bother again?
By Uriel Heilman · February 21, 2010

The United Nations Security Council, shown in session on Feb. 18, 2010, has passed sanctions legislation three times against Iran but has failed to curb the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions. (UN Photo / Eskinder Debebe)

1 out of 1

Other Media
The United Nations Security Council, shown in session on Feb. 18, 2010, has passed sanctions legislation three times against Iran but has failed to curb the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions. (UN Photo / Eskinder Debebe)

NEW YORK (JTA) — For years, sanctions have been the world’s answer to Iran’s suspected pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Three times already — in 2006, 2007 and 2008 — the U.N. Security Council passed sanctions legislation aimed at obstructing Iran’s nuclear capabilities and prodding the government in Tehran into cooperating.

The result: Iran moved ahead with building clandestine nuclear facilities, installing centrifuges and enriching unranium while refusing full access to international weapons inspectors and turning down deals with the West. Last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency issued a report saying it had evidence of “past or current undisclosed activities” by Iran to build a nuclear warhead.

Tehran repeatedly has made clear that its policy toward the West — on the nuclear issue and other matters, including last year’s disputed election — is defiance and obduracy, not cooperation or capitulation.

Now, in the face of mounting evidence that Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear bomb continues unabated, pro-Israel groups and U.S. and European governments again are pushing for new sanctions.

Given that sanctions haven’t worked in the past, is there any hope that things will be different this time?

“We won’t know the answer until we actually try,” said Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice-chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the main U.S. Jewish umbrella group on Mideast-related issues.

“Sanctions can have an impact if they’re the right kind of sanctions, if they’re not going to be put off,” Hoenlein said. “The question is implementation. It’s not moving fast enough. The Iranians only understand one language: They have to understand this is showdown time.”

For now the approach among Jewish organizational leaders who have led the campaign to halt Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons is to continue to promote sanctions — both by the United Nations and by individual countries, including the United States. The thinking is that sanctions currently under consideration are considerably tougher than earlier rounds and must be tried before any other options can be explored.

“If we’re willing to put meaningful, painful sanctions in place, it can work,” said Josh Block, spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which has been the main lobbying group pushing Congress for sanctions on Iran.

“Do we have the ability to create significant economic pain for the Iranian government? Yes. Are they willing to change their behavior based on that impact? We don’t know,” Block acknowledged.

The new U.N. sanctions would target Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and more severely restrict Iran’s banking industry. For enactment, nine of the U.N. Security Council’s members must vote for them, and none of the five permanent, veto-wielding members — China, Russia, the United States, Britain and France — can block them.

Russia, an early holdout, is now sending signals it favors new sanctions, but China has yet to agree. Four more yes votes would be necessary from the 10 rotating members: Austria, Bosnia-Herzegovina , Brazil, Gabon, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, Turkey and Uganda. The four votes are not yet in place, insiders say, and the date for a vote on sanctions continues to be pushed back.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress is set to pass broad unilateral sanctions that would target Iran’s energy sector.

As the day of reckoning with a nuclear Iran fast approaches, advocates in the Jewish community are being forced to confront the question of where to go beyond sanctions.

There are no sure answers. Sanctions have not worked so far, and the U.S. administration doesn’t appear close to considering the military option.

Even if Israel were to circumvent the United States and strike Iran, it would be hard to wipe out the country’s nuclear facilities, which are thought to include sites that are hidden, underground, scattered and heavily fortified.

Some Jewish groups have begun talking about how to live with a nuclear Iran.

Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, the founder and president of The Israel Project, said that even if sanctions couldn’t stop Iran from going nuclear, they still could help deter a nuclear Iran from using its weapons.

“The idea that the game is over if Iran has a nuclear device is mistaken,” Mizrahi told JTA. “As long as Iran hasn’t used a nuclear device to shoot anybody or give it to terrorists, we still have to give it a full-court press.”

It’s possible, she noted, that Iran already has obtained a nuclear device from North Korea or other clandestine methods.

“Even if they were to have a nuclear device and a rocket today, it would still be useful to have sanctions,” Mizrahi said. “They can still be dissuaded from using their weapons and giving them up.”

With the time remaining for effective sanctions to have an impact on the Iranian regime dwindling, is it time to go to Plan B?

“There are plan B’s,” Hoenlein said. “We have not advocated military action. We don’t believe that’s our role. We believe all options should be on the table, including that. If they don’t believe all options are on the table, they will never move.”

Plan B, he said, could entail anything from a naval blockade to military strikes. The United States does not yet appear to be at that point, but of course Israel at any point could move to its own Plan B.

Even as they concede that serious questions remain about the efficacy of new sanctions and other options, U.S. Jewish organizational leaders are canvassing the country and holding meetings around the world to warn about the dangers of a nuclear Iran — and not just so they can feel like they’re doing something or to give their audiences a reason to lay awake at night.

“I’m not trying to suggest this as a panacea,” said Rabbi Steve Gutow, executive director of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, a policy umbrella group. “We still have to get the sanctions thing passed.”

Talking about the dangers of a nuclear Iran can energize people to lobby their elected representatives, press the issue at consulates and embassies, and talk to associates with business interests overseas about the imperative to isolate Iran, he said.

The point, several Jewish officials said, is to not give up.

“Because of our history, because of our teachings, I think we’ve been taught that one cannot just sit by and watch evil win,” Gutow said, citing Theodor Herzl’s famous “Im Tirtzu” line – “If you will it, it is no dream.”

Mizrahi also cited Herzl.

“I’m not optimistic about any of these things, but as Golda Meir put it, Jews don’t have the option of being pessimists,” Mizrahi said. “If every time the world said it’s impossible for Israel to accomplish something, if they’d listened Israel wouldn’t have gone back to reclaim the land, drain the swamps and build the country. I believe very strongly in what Herzl said.”

To read more, click here
jta.org