fbpx

Jew vs. Jew (vs. Jew) on the Iran deal

[additional-authors]
July 23, 2015

The Jews of Israel oppose the agreement with Iran. The Jews of America support it. The just-released Jewish Journal survey turns an assumption into a fact: The two largest Jewish communities cannot agree on a major world development that could significantly change the state of the Jewish state. 

Israel will discover now — much to many Israelis’ surprise (because they don’t much understand American Jews) — that it cannot count on the majority of American Jewry to fight the battle against the agreement alongside it. A majority of American Jews will discover that amid all the noise made by opponents of the deal, not much has changed for them as a group: They support President Barack Obama; they vote Democratic; they approve of the agreement. American Jews are just like Americans, as sociologist Steven Cohen, who oversaw the survey, writes: They are all skeptical about the deal, but their politics dictate the way they ultimately see it. 

* * *

There is one question that stands out in this poll as deserving the title “the most troubling.” That is, troubling for those who highly value the bond between Jewish communities. “Does the agreement make Israel safer or more endangered?” Cohen asked his Jewish-American respondents. And they have an answer for him: It endangers Israel.

So here, presumably, you have it all, encapsulated in one question: American Jews support the deal, even though they are skeptical about its outcome, and even though they understand that by supporting the deal, they contribute to making Israel less safe. 

But pause before you jump to such a conclusion. What the numbers tell us is a more nuanced story: Jews supportive of the deal are, generally speaking, those Jews who believe that Israel will be safer as a consequence of the deal. Jews opposing the deal are those who believe it endangers Israel. There are very few Jews who support the deal who think it’s bad for Israel. 

In other words: Jews — like most other humans — tend to understand the world in a way that is compatible with their beliefs. If they support Obama, they believe Obama. If they believe Obama, they also believe him when he says that the deal is good for Israel’s security. If they believe the deal is good for Israel’s security, they can support the deal with a clear conscience. 

* * *

There is not one but rather two great rifts between Jews because of the deal with Iran. There is the rift between American Jews and Israeli Jews, and there is the rift between American Jews and American Jews. 

As Cohen writes, “even the pro-Israel segment of the Jewish population comes down in favor of the deal.” But there is no unanimity. In fact, among Jews there is “sharper polarization” than “among non-Jews” on Iran. Jews supporting it are more supportive; Jews opposing it dislike it with more passion. 

We should not underestimate the possible consequences of the Jewish American-Jewish American rift. In many Jewish-American communities Iran is becoming a toxic issue. Iran is an invitation for bickering, infighting, acrimony. Although the Jews of America and the Jews of Israel can disagree from afar, the Jews of America (those in favor of the agreement) and the other Jews of America (those against the agreement) have to find a way to keep living their communal life — to the extent that they live a communal life — while having a significant disagreement over a highly volatile issue. 

* * *

This is hardly the first time in which the two largest Jewish communities — a combined 80-something percent of the Jewish world — do not have similar priorities. 

Jewish-Israeli and Jewish-American opinion on the Iraq War, for instance, generated a textbook mirror image: almost 80 percent of Jewish Israelis supported the war, while almost 80 percent of Jewish Americans opposed the war. Israeli Jews — when it comes to the Iraq War — were more in line with American Mormons than with American Jews. For anyone to presume that American Jews might support a policy, or might urge an American president to support one, just because Israelis see it as beneficial, would be a mistake, as the Iraq War clearly proved.

* * *

Iran is different than Iraq. The agreement with Iran is different than the war with Iraq. In fact, it is different in two ways. First, a war is a matter more serious than an agreement; second, the threat of Iran is more serious than the threat of Iraq.

Thus, opposing the Iraq War was relatively easy and risk-free, conscience-wise. Most American Jews did not think the war was good for U.S. security and no one argued forcefully that it was essential to keep Israel secure. But supporting the Iran deal is different. The U.S. government that most Jews elected strongly argues that the agreement is essential to prevent another war like Iraq — the war to which Jews were opposed. Israel and other opponents of the agreement argue that it is detrimental “existentially” to Israel’s security. 

In other words, on both sides of the Iran debate, the arguments are almost overwhelming: oppose the deal — says the Obama administration — and you risk American lives, risk another bloody war in the Middle East. Support the deal — says Israel — and you risk the lives of Jews, the existence of the largest Jewish community in the world, the only Jewish state. 

When the debate turns to such dire terms, when the stakes are presented in such a manner, we all know it is going to get ugly. Jews are going to accuse other Jews of warmongering. Jews are going to accuse  other Jews of betrayal. Jews are going to compare the behavior of Jews today to their behavior back in the 1930s. Jews are going to have to insist that Israel does not represent their views and interests. Jews are going to get scared, edgy, angry, disappointed. 

* * *

Many times in the past, here and in other places, I wrote about our need — the need of Jews — to agree to disagree. But as I said, Iran is different for proponents and opponents. So I am not sure there is really a way to prevent the ugly scenario from playing itself out. In fact, you can count the Jewish rift as a first damaging impact of a troubling agreement with Iran.

Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

Print Issue: In the Shadow of Nova | May 3, 2024

Why are anti-Israel protesters on college campuses so agitated? An exhibit in New York City on the Oct. 7 massacre at the Nova festival shines a light on the confusion and madness of our times.

More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.