Is Iran Now in Trump's Crosshairs?

Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaking at a press conference (JTA)

One of the more striking aspects of the media coverage surrounding the capture, arrest, and eventual trial of Venezuelan dictator and drug trafficker Nicolás Maduro was the way it was framed as ‘controversial’, as though opposition to the operation were as morally valid as support for it.

What the mainstream media largely ignored - though it was obvious from those interviewed -  was that the supporters were overwhelmingly expatriate Venezuelans. They were openly grateful, even emotional, thanking the president for finally acting and expressing hope of returning home once democracy is restored.

The protesters opposing the operation, by contrast, were the familiar collection of leftist activists reciting well-worn platitudes about violations of international law, seemingly indifferent to the reality that a brutal dictator ruling by force over an impoverished population would otherwise have remained in power. The same reflexive condemnation was echoed at the UN by predictable European voices eager to portray the beginning of Venezuela’s liberation from socialist dictatorship as a crime.

Despite public denunciations for domestic consumption, Venezuela’s current leadership has pledged cooperation with the United States. Predictably, however, the president’s political opposition in Congress is also outraged. Most acknowledge that Maduro was a vicious dictator responsible for facilitating drug trafficking that has killed countless Americans. They are glad he is gone. Yet still condemn the president for acting without congressional consultation. Once again, they want it both ways.

The irony is hard to miss: Republicans now side with the Venezuelan people, while Democrats effectively side with the dictator by insisting the president was wrong to act and should have left Maduro in power.

Meanwhile, voices on the left - especially in academia - insist with absolute certainty that the operation had nothing to do with drug trafficking or liberation. The real motive, they claim, was oil.

I have rarely seen such anxiety over the supposed collapse of American democracy. Critics warn that the president is becoming a dictator by flouting the Constitution. They are entitled to that view. I do not share it.

In fact, I am encouraged by how world events are unfolding. Ironically, one of the president’s greatest flaws—his unpredictability—has become America’s greatest strategic asset. That mercurial style has helped end the war in Gaza and has put the fear of God into Iran. As I have said before: Iran should be worried. VERY worried. 

Israel has taken notice. And it isn’t only Netanayhu As reported by JTA:

The Venezuela operation drew attention in Israel, where leaders used it to signal a warning to Tehran amid mounting unrest inside Iran. Opposition leader Yair Lapid wrote on X that “the regime in Iran should pay close attention to what is happening in Venezuela,” framing the U.S. action as a broader message to a government facing intensifying protests and riots at home.

That sentiment was reinforced by Secretary of State Marco Rubio:

Speaking on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Rubio said the United States will exert leverage, including continued sanctions and pressure on Venezuela’s oil sector, to ensure that the country “no longer cozy up to Hezbollah and Iran in our own hemisphere.”

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he offered a shorthand for U.S. goals: “No more drug trafficking, no more Iran Hezbollah presence there, and no more using the oil industry to enrich all our adversaries around the world.”

Those who are wringing their hands over a supposed constitutional crisis need not worry. Much - if not most - of the criticism coming from Congress and academia is driven by ideological bias. If there truly were a constitutional emergency, Republicans would not be lining up to support the president.

Some will argue that they do so only out of fear of retaliation. While that may be true about some of them, It is not true about all of them. The idea that an entire party would abandon the Constitution simply to stay in Trump’s good graces is absurd. Much of this debate ultimately comes down to interpretation—of both presidential authority and the Constitution itself. Claims of ‘obvious’ and ‘blatant’” violations are opinions, not settled facts, and are heavily filtered through the ideology of those making those assertions.

This is why I am not worried.

And while Iran once believed the U.S. would never put boots on the ground, it now believes the president might be ‘crazy’ enough to do so, even at legal risk...

 Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free.

Judging a Leader by Character Alone

The president addressing the Knesset (CNBC)

One of the most troubling aspects of our time is how extreme our political divisions have become. There is an increasing inability to recognize any good in one’s ideological opponents. Once opposition to an individual hardens, it becomes almost inevitable that anything positive he does will be interpreted negatively. Viewing political adversaries through a perpetually hostile lens - an ‘evil eye’ so to speak - is a corrosive way to see the world.

Which brings me to Donald Trump.

At the outset of his first campaign, I largely agreed with the prevailing view that Trump would be a disaster for the country and an embarrassment of historic proportions. His demeanor and lack of moral character were obvious and disturbing. My conviction was strong enough that I held my nose and voted for Mrs. Clinton.

My thinking was simple: as flawed as she was, she at least appeared to possess some basic decency and an understanding of how to conduct herself in high office. On Israel, I expected more of the same. No worse than her predecessor, who was not really anti-Israel as many of my co-religionists have said. Just misguided about what was in Israel’s best interests. I assumed it would be four more years of continuity.

She lost. And I thought the world had come to an end.

It didn’t.

Trump’s character never improved. In many ways, it worsened. But his policies often did not reflect that character. Instead, they reflected values I support as someone who leans politically conservative.

Nowhere was he more positive than in his Middle East policies. Without delving into excessive detail, the evidence speaks for itself: Trump is widely admired across Israel’s political spectrum. That became unmistakable when he addressed the Knesset shortly after securing Hamas’s agreement to release all living hostages. An agreement that was, in fact, carried out.

Yet the animus toward Trump here remains so intense that many of his opponents refuse to acknowledge any accomplishment.

None of this is to argue that Trump is above criticism. Far from it. Some of his actions have been deeply damaging... 

 Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free.

Nicolás Maduro, the US, and Israel

Nicolas Maduro, and Palestinian Ambassador Linda Ali (Liberation news)

U.S. military power is back. No longer will America be viewed as a paper tiger—a description often applied to U.S. military strength during and after the Cold War. The idea was that despite our advanced military technology and military might - which included unparalleled intelligence and surveillance capabilities, we lacked the will to use them, haunted by the fear of another Vietnam. More than 40,000 American troops were killed there propping up a weak democracy that never had a realistic chance of survival.

There were exceptions. Iraq was one. That experiment in regime change proved chaotic and fell far short of expectations. Afghanistan followed, reinforcing the perception that despite immense military power on paper, the United States was unwilling - or unable - to use it decisively. The paper tiger theory seemed confirmed.

Until now.

Nicolás Maduro was captured in a military operation whose precision and success mirrored that of Israel’s most daring actions. The results have produced enormous benefits for the world in general and the United States in particular.  Not the least of which was the restoration of control over oil refineries built and operated by U.S. companies and nationalized under Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chávez. And perhaps more importantly is the restoration of American dominance in the Western Hemisphere.

But the biggest prize belongs to the Venezuelan people themselves. Both those living in Venezuela and expatriates here in the United States. Their reaction was ecstatic. They thanked the president for this action and celebrated the fact that, for the first time in decades, there is a real chance democracy will be restored to their country.

This operation also sends a clear message to regimes like Iran: They should be worried. Very worried. No longer can they rely on the paper tiger theory of American power. No longer can they assume the United States will never pursue regime change for fear of putting boots on the ground and risking American lives. While it may still be true that the U.S. prefers to avoid large-scale deployments, we have now demonstrated that – under this president - when the stakes are high enough, hesitation is no longer an option. That has in fact already established by the US precsion attack against an underground nuclear en rchment facility in Iran – thanks to Israel paving the way. This time it was the US military alone that did it.

By coincidence, at this very moment - a popular uprising is underway in Iran. It began as a protest against runaway inflation that has pushed much of the population below the poverty line. But it has since grown into a broader revolt by Iranians who despise their government. Many of them protested in the past, only to watch fellow demonstrators executed for doing so. That fear - of death simply for protesting - had long kept them silent.

No longer.

Their collapsing economy appears to have pushed them past desperation...

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's fre

The Myopic Charedi View of Daas Torah

One of the many signs denigrating the IDF seen at Charedi protests (eJP)

By now, I should be used to this attitude. And yet, I still can’t quite wrap my head around it. The default posture of the Daas Torahniks is the total suspension of one’s own common sense in deference to authority - simply because someone older and presumed wiser in Torah knowledge says so, without explanation. They call this Daas Torah. Questioning it is treated not as disagreement, but as near heresy.

This mindset was once again on full display in the backlash to a letter signed by over 100 Charedi donors stating they would no longer support Yeshivos and Kollelim that denigrate the IDF. Notably, the letter did not challenge the Charedi position opposing military service. Their demand was far more basic: do not disparage those who are risking - and in many cases sacrificing - their lives for the Jewish people.

That should be self-evident.

While I personally believe Charedim should serve as a general rule, with exemptions where appropriate, this letter was not about conscription. It was about ending rhetoric that goes beyond ideological opposition and crosses into outright contempt for soldiers and their families.

First, let me be clear: if organizers misled signatories or attached names without consent, that would be wrong and indefensible. But beyond one or possibly two claims, there is no evidence that this occurred. In any event, that controversy is not the real issue. The reaction to the letter is.

You don’t need to be a Gadol to understand the motivation behind it. How Charedi leadership can tolerate - let alone engage in - denigration of people who protect not only secular Israelis or religious Zionists, but the Charedim themselves, is astonishing...

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free

The Cost of Belonging

(Mishpacha)

If I had to choose one word to define 2025, it would be ‘affordability’. Contrary to popular Jewish belief, it wasn’t anti-Zionism that propelled Zohran Mamdani to victory. It was the crushing cost of living in New York City. Housing and food have become unaffordable for the average wage earner. That’s what he ran on and why he won.

And this is not just a New York problem. Across the country, prices for nearly everything have steadily risen over the past five years. While economists predict improvement going forward, those projections have yet to translate into lived reality.

Orthodox Jews feel this pressure more acutely than most. In addition to ordinary living costs, we shoulder expenses unique to religious life. Most notably Jewish education. A school that provides a solid religious and secular education can easily cost upwards of $25,000 per child per year. For a family with four children, that translates into a theoretical annual tuition bill of $100,000.  And many Orthodox Jewish families have more than four children.

Add to that the higher cost of kosher food and the extraordinary expense of Pesach, when households must restock their kitchens entirely. Even this partial accounting makes one thing clear: living a middle-class Orthodox life increasingly requires an upper-middle-class income.

How can an entire community sustain that?

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free

How Bad is Antisemitism, Really?

Vice-President Vance and Tucker Carlson (Business Insider)

I don’t think now is the time to panic. I still believe that the vast majority of Americans are not antisemitic. I don’t even think most are anti-Israel. A lot of whom are upset at how they think Israel conducted the war in Gaza.  Although I now admit I underestimated the extent of both.

That said, it is impossible to ignore the growing influence of antisemitic voices on the right, led most prominently by Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens. They are attempting to shift the national conversation in a dangerous direction. Still, their millions of followers represent only a small fraction of the American public.

The same dynamic exists on the left. Antisemitism there is usually disguised as anti-Zionism, providing plausible deniability for motives that are often anything but benign. While there are rare cases of people who oppose Israel without harboring animus toward Jews, those cases are the exception.

Detaching Israel from Jewish identity reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of Judaism itself. Jews who claim Israel has no bearing on their Jewishness are typically ignorant of their own heritage. An ignorance that has fueled a growing number of anti-Zionist Jewish organizations, often composed of younger Jews whose progressive political values have replaced Jewish ones they were never taught.

Many commentators point to the election of Zohran Mamdani, a fiercely anti-Zionist Muslim, as mayor of New York City as evidence of rising antisemitism. Some argue his victory gives antisemites tacit permission to emerge more openly and cause harm to Jews. That concern is legitimate.

Yet I do not believe Mamdani is inherently antisemitic, nor do I believe he will abandon his promise to protect New York’s Jewish community. Even while relentlessly condemning Israel. In fact, as troubling as Mamdani is, I would trust him with my life sooner than I would Tucker Carlson.

So why am I still confident that most Americans are not only not antisemitic, but actually appreciate Jewish contributions to society - historically and today, at least to the extent they are aware of them?

Start with evangelical Christians... 

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free

Marshall Fisher, OBM

(L-R) Me, Marshall and Rabbi Zvi Block

Just got back from the funeral of one of my oldest friends. I was asked by his daughter, Shaindel, to read the eulogy she wrote for him. After which I delivered my own.

The Gemara in Berachos, Daf Lamed-Gimmel, Amud Beis, tells us:

“B’makom sheba’alei teshuvah omdim, ein tzaddikim gemurim yecholim la’amod.”  Where ba’alei teshuvah stand, even the most completely righteous tzaddikim cannot stand.

I have always been in awe of my friend Marshall — Moshe Tzvi ben Yehudah Leib Halevi. Raised in a non-observant home, he became observant entirely on his own initiative. Not because it was ingrained in him. Not out of habit or rote observance, as is so often the case with those of us raised in observant homes. He used to tell me that he chose to be observant because he believed it was the right way to live. A ma’amin through and through.

I met Marshall over sixty years ago, before either of us were married. He had just returned from spending several months in at Yeshivas ITRI in Israel. While there, he met and became friends with Rabbi Tzvi Block, an old friend of mine from my years in Telshe. When Marshall decided to return to Chicago, Zvi told him to contact me — despite not knowing my phone number or address...

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free

Rabbi Feldman's Daas Torah

Rabbi Feldman at an anti IDF lecture in Ramat Bet Shemesh (Rationalist Judaism)

I was not there, so my impressions may be colored by the sources reporting it. Still, I find it very difficult to be dan l’kaf zechus - to view favorably - an anti-IDF lecture delivered by a Ner Israel Rosh Yeshiva to residents of Ramat Beit Shemesh, a city populated by many expatriate Americans. Imploring them not to enlist!

His argument did not center on the familiar claim that Torah study supersedes all else, or that it is Torah learning rather than the IDF that protects the Jewish people. Instead, his case was based on the belief that army service will likely cause religious recruits to abandon their religious practices. That this, in fact, is the very purpose of the IDF.

This is the argument most often cited to justify opposition to drafting Charedim, even those who are not learning full-time in a Yeshiva or Kollel.

However, when he uses the same argument against joining even Chashmonaim—IDF units created specifically to accommodate Charedi religious needs – he loses me. Rabbi Feldman relies on anecdotal evidence from colleagues that claim these units fail to live up to their promises. And tells of his own experience with a student at his Yeshiva that told him about his brother who was allegedly forced to violate Shabbos. These stories are offered as proof that such units are unreliable and should not be joined either. To consider this a common occurrence rather than an unusual occurrence – or based on the circumstances described and IDF rules – is probably not even true (as Rabbi Slifkin points out.)  

Rabbi Slifkin does an excellent job refuting all of Rabbi Feldman’s anti-IDF arguments. The reality is that there are no decisive arguments that justify the Charedi world’s refusal to serve in the IDF. The real culprit is Daas Torah. Which also happened to be Rabbi Feldman’s fallback position when he attempted to explain why Rabbi Slifkin’s books reconciling Torah and science were deemed heretical and banned.

If memory serves, Rabbi Feldman initially endorsed those books as a legitimate way of reconciling Torah and science when the two appeared to conflict. After hearing that Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, whom many at the time regarded as the Gadol HaDor, had labeled them heretical he sought confirmation. He flew to Israel, consulted Rav Elyashiv, and once that judgment was confirmed, he ‘joined the chorus’ of rabbis that called those books heretical and endorsed the ban. How Rav Elayshiv himself came to that conclusion is the subject of great controversy but beyond the scope of this post.

How could Rabbi Feldman have endorsed books containing heresy in the first place? 

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free

The Modern World - Insularity or Exposure?

One of the greatest dangers to Jewish continuity is the extent that insulation has taken hold in certain segments of the Jewish world. The further to the right one goes religiously, the greater the degree of insularity. Two of the most prominent examples are the New York municipalities of New Square and Kiryas Joel, which have taken insularity to its logical extreme: isolationism.

These two Chassidic villages were created explicitly to insulate their inhabitants from the influences of the modern world. The fear is that any exposure at all will undermine everything that has been painstakingly taught in the effort to keep their communities holy and pure.

Why is this such an existential danger?

When people live in isolation, exposed only to the narrow views and customs of their own community, and then inevitably come into contact with the outside world - only to discover that it is not nearly as evil as they were taught - it can call their entire way of life into question. That includes the observance of halacha itself. While this is not the usual outcome, it is certainly a contributing factor among those who ultimately abandon observance.

I understand the desire to shield children from the immorality of the broader culture. I even sympathize with that goal. But isolationism is not the best way to accomplish it. Nor is its kissing cousin, extreme insularity.

Many people defend this lifestyle as a matter of choice and religious freedom. That is certainly true. But at what price? Is it worth it? And is there a better way to achieve the same goal?

I believe there is.

Some degree of insularity is necessary and even beneficial. But there is a point at which it becomes absurd and counterproductive. Obviously, I would not allow a young child to watch an R-rated movie. But would I allow that child to have a smartphone? I’m not so sure. And if not, should I forbid them from befriending a child who has one?

These are legitimate questions without easy answers. Where do we draw the line between necessary insularity that strengthens a child and excessive isolation that ultimately harms them?

The Charedi world is increasingly moving in the direction of greater insularity—approaching outright isolationism. As a Centrist looking in from the outside, I believe this is a serious mistake.

I was therefore pleasantly surprised to see Rabbi Avrohom Neuberger, a frequent contributor to Mishpacha Magazine, make precisely this case in his latest column. His message closely mirrors my own, though he presents it in the context of Lakewood-style communities...

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free

Is Jewish Unity Even Possible Anymore?

NCSYers (public high school kids) in Lakewood

My differences with the Charedi world are well known to my readers. Some of those differences are profound. And yet, I long for unity among my people. A unity that surely includes the Charedi world.

That is because, despite my differences with them, Charedim are an essential cog in the wheel of Jewish continuity, and in defining one of the most vital missions the Jewish people on this planet: the study of the Torah – the word of God as interpreted by the sages throughout Jewish history.

No single Jewish demographic pursues that mission more diligently than does the Charedi world. Especially the yeshiva world, which is dedicated entirely to that purpose, to the exclusion of almost everything else.

I am not going to debate whether there are other ways - or even better ways for some people to achieve this goal. But there is no debate about the time and intensity of Torah study that takes place in a yeshiva like BMG (Beis Medrash Govoha) - better known as Lakewood. And there are many other Yeshivos, both here and in Israel, about which the same can be said.

And yet, the differences that I - and many others - have with them are so divisive that they almost seem insurmountable. If anything revealed that sad reality more clearly than the war in Gaza, I would like to know what it is. The anger between religious Jews who support army service for Charedim and those who oppose it has never been greater. And it still prevails even now, after the fighting in Gaza has ceased.

I am a Centrist Modern Orthodox Jew, with some pretty strong opinions that and - about other Jewish demographics. And yet, I long for unity among all the people of Israel. Including left-wing Orthodox Jews, secular Jews, heterodox Jews, Sephardi Jews - and certainly no less Charedi Yeshiva type Jews and Chasidic Jews.

At the core, however, the unity that should be a given - is the unity of observant Jews. This does not mean we cannot be unified as a people with non-observant Jews. It is simply that by our observance -  and their lack thereof - we have less in common. That being said, the love we must have for each and every Jew is the same.

Meanwhile the shared observance that should automatically unify Jews of every observant demographic  - is about the furthest thing from reality. And even further from reality is the Orthodox unity with non-Orthodox Jews.

Strangely enough, it may be non-Orthodox youth who can show us the way.

NCSYer shaking hands with BMG's R' Yisroel Neumann

Yesterday, NCSY took a group of public school students to BMG, where they were given a shiur by BMG’s Rabbi Freundlich. Today they met Rabbi BMG Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Yisroel Neumann.

One might think this is the last place you would take a group of public high school teenagers to inspire them. But that is exactly what happened. These young men were exposed to a part of Judaism they probably didn’t even know existed. And I would be willing to bet they admired what they saw.

That’s  because they have not been tainted by the personal biases the rest of us carry. True - we have legitimate differences with them  But that does not mean we shouldn’t unite as one large observant family despite those differences. We need to hear what the other side says and understand how sincere they are in their beliefs. At the same time we need to admire what each side contributes, agree to disagree on some things and still consider ourselves part of the same family. Unified as a people despite those differences.

These young public high school students show us that it can be done.

The question then becomes: what about heterodox rabbis who preach what observant Jews consider anti-Torah views? How can we possibly unite with them?

Emes Ve-Emunah will no longer be fully available here. To finish reading this post and future posts - and comment on them - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe. But it's easy and it's free