Renounce Genocide, Then Negotiate

Time to Focus on Iran’s Goals, not their Means

The more the war goes on and the more random and violent the Iranian response, two things come to mind. First, that this war came too late, not too early. Second, that Iran did not need a nuclear bomb to achieve their goal of destroying Israel as their long range missile program along with Hamas and Hezbollah monstrosity was enough. Imagine, if you can, October 7, 2023 with the addition of a barrage from Hezbollah in Lebanon, their soldiers crossing the northern border Hamas style and a further 2,000 one ton ballistic missiles coming from Iran. Pointed at Tel Aviv, Haifa and various air-force bases and you can imagine the damage. One single one ton missile destroyed enough of the city of Bat-Yam, to the south of Tel-Aviv to make 1% of its population of about 130,000.

Iran did not even need its nuclear program but only its ballistic missile program. This is something that was at the center of Israel’s fight against the Obama-Europe-Russia agreement with Iran. They were looking at a four-pronged approach to destroying Israel – ballistic missiles, global terror against Israel and the Jewish people, regional terror trained proxies and the nuclear program. The first three might have worked on its own and the “world” would never have given it a second thought since the whole non-proliferation argument would have been moot.

However, the goal still would have been the same – the destruction of Israel and the completion of Hitler’s war against the world’s Jews. That has been the raison d’etre of the Islamic Republic of Iran since is birth, midwifed by France and other progressive western countries and ideologies less than 50 years ago.

There is no “colonialist” or “occupation’ argument in Israel’s war against Iran. There is no progressive crime at all that Israel is alleged to be perpetrating against Iran. There is no “genocide” argument that the progressive world can use against Israel in its attack on the Islamic Republic. There is only the argument - that Israel has no right to use offensive capabilities in its own defense. And this non-right is not a universal non-right but one that only Israel, the Jewish State, must abide.

The blatant anti-Semitism is not new of course but part of the progressive left has been using to decades -and sadly the neo-Lindburghian right is using today. The fight against Israel is justified – plain and simple. Israel’s use of offensive power against this fight is unjustified – plain and simple.

This reminds me of a trip to the United States a few years ago. We went in to attend the wedding of a son of good friends and we were seated at a table with a relatively new rabbi. This man was wealthy from his hi-tech exit and decided that he wanted to get involved in progressive politics. He decided that the best entry was to become a Rabbi. He got ordinated a and went to create small, wealthy, progressive congregations in New York City. He didn’t need to get paid so it was not a problem getting a position. Seated next to him at the wedding we of course discussed Israel. As a progressive, he went on about Palestinian rights and horrible “settlers”. As a polite guest I said I thought he was mistaken but I understood his argument. The wedding of a friend is not the place for political arguments.

But then he started the discussion about Iran. I don’t now remember if it was before or after the Obama-Iran deal but it was certainly in the news. It was not only that he was in favor of the deal, as disturbing as that would have been, but he thought that Israel had no argument to make in denying Iran their legitimate “defensive” needs against Israel – as if Israel once threatened Iran over anything other than their nuclear project. As if Israel ever threatened to destroy Iran. To me, this was the sign of pure antisemitism be he a rabbi or not. A person who defends Iran’s “right” to threaten genocide against the Jews and defends their quest to carry it out, is an anti-Semite. It would be difficult to argue otherwise.

I lost some of my politeness in this argument – I hope my friends didn’t notice.

Before October 7, an argument could have been made for an independent Palestinian state. It was one I didn’t agree with, but I understood it. After October 7, no such legitimate argument can be made anymore. Regarding Iran – there was never a time where a legitimate argument could be made for the Islamic Republic of Iran to possess nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles or proxies that exist for the purpose of creating terrorist attacks, annihilating Israel and destabilizing other governments in the area.

We are now seeing cracks, as we always do, in support of Israel’s war against Iran. We discussed European diplomats yesterday and we are hearing more of the “war to save Bibi” mantra by people who know better.

But as it was 10 years ago and 5 years ago and October 6, 2023, it is today – the Islamic Republic of Iran must be rid of their offensive capabilities because the goal of the regime is the destruction of Israel, genocide of Jews, destabilization of unfriendly Arab governments and the fall of the West. If all along Iran spoke of building a strong country and living in peace with its neighbors and if they didn’t put the destruction of Israel as its main goal, maybe all of these programs could be overlooked. But we have all paid a heavy price for ignoring pronouncements that people, movements and countries have made over the last 100 years calling for genocide against the Jews.

Turkey’s Erdogan has joined the chorus that the only way to end Iran’s nuclear program is through negotiations. That time has past. There can be no negotiations as long as they are not willing to renounce their genocidal goals. Missiles, nuclear facilities – these are all the means. It is the ends that the Islamic Republic must change and if they are not willing to then unconditional surrender and regime change can be the only goal of this war. That is the falsity of the negotiation obsessed. They think this is about how many centrifuges or how much heavy water or how many ballistic missiles and their range. The issue is about the Islamic Republic renouncing it aims of genocide against Jews. If they don’t do that -and we know they can’t because that is all they are - then all the negotiating is a moral and strategic outrage.