We don’t agree on some pretty important points.

I fundamentally disagree with your sweeping generalization of Shi’ite religious culture: “Shi’ites are culturally self-sacrificing, unto death.” This is simplistic and inaccurate. I also believe, as do many analysts, that while the Islamic regime might be radical, it is not suicidal. (Israel’s defense minister himself has admitted this).

With all due respect, visit Iran and speak to the Jewish community members there personally before holding forth on what you believe it must be like to be a Persian Jew. In my conversations with this community, many members openly admitted that it is certainly not easy to be Jewish in an Islamic country – but they also stated honestly that Israel’s oppressive actions do not make their lives any easier. I believe they are being very honest when they say this. To claim they are coerced into anti-Israel positions is really quite patronizing.

My worry is the opposite of yours: those who characterize this issue as an existential threat rather than a difficult and challenging diplomatic conflict are helping to create (to use your words) “a tragedy in the making.” I agree with you that we need a “sober assessment of the present situation.” Overblown fear-based foreign policy will only bring us closer to yet another disastrous Western war in the Middle East.

My comparison between Iran and Nazi Germany relates to the possibility that, God Forbid, a nuclear weapon used against Israel would amount to a second Holocaust. The other parallel is that in both states a fanatical overriding ideology is/was the main focus. Given the statements of Ahmadinejad, of Khamenei, and other senior officials and clerics in the Iranian government, this needs to be taken very seriously. Ahmadinejad may not command the military, but those in Iran who do command it, agree with him. He has the support of Khamenei. He is in a sense a figurehead, but one who speaks the thoughts of those who hold the power. I’m sure it is true as you wrote, that Ahmedinejad taunts the West and says many things for domestic consumption, but that does not mean that he doesn’t mean what he says. From Khomeini until the present day, these ideologues are dead serious in their intent. The analogy with China leaves out a basic difference between the two countries. China is atheistic and nothing if not practical. They will compromise when needed. Shi’ites are culturally self-sacrificing, unto death. They have a strongly inculcated sense of martyrdom and fighting injustice as they interpret it because of the beginnings of their faith when it broke with Sunni Islam. Their ritual self-abuse and blood-letting on the Ashura holiday speaks to this cultural aspect. Remember that this is a society that could send its young boys to certain death in minefields so as to provide safe passage for Iranian soldiers fighting against Iraq. Inconceivable. I remember on of their leaders saying that it would be worth it for the entire Iranian nation

Of course, the position of Iran’s Jewish community is not that which prevailed for the Jews of Germany under the Nazis. The Nazi fanaticism was an obsession with race. As you know, the extremists in Iran have a different type of ideology and obsession, and it is one that unfortunately again focuses on Jews, embodied in the State of Israel. The Jews in Iran, although they are a “protected minority”, face some severe challenges. At least 17 Jews, including Jewish community leaders, have been executed since Khomeini’s Islamic revolution, most accused of spying for Israel and the United States or on other charges. In a highly publicized incident, in 1979, Habib Alqanayan, a head of the Jewish community was executed. There have also been incidents of confiscation of Jewish property. The leadership of the Iranian Jewish community have often been coerced to publicly condemn Israel and take part in anti-Israel and anti-Zionist demonstrations. In 2000 there were show trials of 10 members of the Jewish community for allegedly spying for “the Zionist regime” with forced confessions by a number of them on Iranian TV. All indications are that they were innocent. As an aside, the members of the Baha’i community have been terribly persecuted in Iran. The fact that their world headquarters is in Israel appears to enrage the regime, and they have taken it out on the Baha’i, many of whom were actually converts from Judaism in the last decades of the 19th century, a fact that is not so well known.

I just came back from dinner and by chance an Iranian Jewish woman was sitting next to me. We were at a crowded Cheesecake Factory, and were both sitting at the bar. Somehow we got to talking, and I must say this beautiful lady depressed me with her analysis. She told me that Iran will not be stopped from getting nuclear weapons and that Israel will not stop them. I disagreed with her, but she clung to her pessimism. She also told me that in Iran the leaders of the Jewish community had to participate in demonstrations where the Israeli flag was burned. She said that Jews are allowed to go to synagogue and all the rest, but Israel is totally verboten to them. I don’t envy any Jew who lives in Iran. This is a community where Jews have to watch their step.

So, in the final analysis, it may be that we agree after all. Neither of us will rule out the military option, though neither off us wants to see it used. Our disagreement centers on the fact that I believe strongly that negotiations and discussions will prove utterly fruitless. You believe the opposite. Many of the leaders of Iran tried very hard to nurture hope in those who had no idea how single-minded they are. They played for time by pretending they were open to a compromise. This was just a tactic.

My worry is that well-meaning people like yourself will continue to downplay the existential threat from Iran long enough that countering this enemy with its deadly intent (after all, Iran is the nation that organizes weekly “Death to Israel” chants by massive crowds) will become more and more complicated and fraught with risks. And as the risks grow the chance that the people of Iran will be caught in the blowback of their government’s genocidal plan grows too. It’s a tragedy in the making. What is needed is a sober assessment of the present situation, not unreal hopes for peace. Giving aid to the Iranian opposition to help topple this regime would be the best thing any government or individual could do.

I hope we have some significant points on which we can agree.

When you wrote “The Iranians who are threatening Israel have the same mindset as the Germans had in the 1930s” I took this to be a fairly direct comparison between the two regimes. And I disagree sharply with your claim that Iran is “the closest national phenomenon to Nazi Germany we have seen since the Second World War.”

There’s very little to compare. Nazi Germany systematically oppressed and tried to exterminate the Jews of Europe, starting with those in their country. By contrast, the Persian Jewish community is under no significant threat from the Islamic regime. They are, in fact, a protected minority under the Iranian Constitution.

You are essentially basing your arguments on Iran’s nuclear ambitions and certain statements its President has made regarding the State of Israel. This is a fundamentally different geopolitical scenario. If were going to compare Iran to another regime historically, I’d say China is a much more apt comparison.

Indeed, during the Cold War, China also had nuclear ambitions and made strong threatening statements about its capitalist superpower neighbor to the West. In 1954, Mao Tse-tung made the following famous statement to a visiting head of state: “If someone else can drop an atomic bomb, then I can too. The death of 10 or 20 million people is nothing to be afraid of.”

Of course, today China is now a nuclear power, it has been contained by the West and it has normalized its relations with the US. I’d say there’s an important lesson to be learned here.

Iran is not Nazi Germany, and Ahmadinejad is no Hitler. Not by a long shot. In the first place, he is utterly irrelevant to dealings with Israel. He is not involved in foreign policy and he has no control over the military whatsoever. Most analysts who know anything about Iranian politics have pointed out that Ahmadinejad’s statements toward Israel amount to political rhetoric aimed at baiting the West, diverting attention away from serious domestic woes, and shoring up his popularity with certain elements in the Arab world.

Why do countries desire nuclear weapons? History has demonstrated the answer very clearly. Nations seek nuclear weapons not so much because they intend to use them against another, but precisely because they want to protect themselves from neighboring nations that do have nuclear weapons.

Iran is no different in this regard. When I was in Iran I spoke with an Ayatollah who made a strong impression on me – not because he was a raving religious extremist, but quite the opposite: he was a remarkably savvy political pragmatist. He said to me, “Look, you have to realize what it feels like to live in our country. There are 14 nations that border on ours. One invaded us recently. Others have nuclear capabilities. Israel and the US, both of which have nuclear weapons, have been threatening our nation with regime change for years. If we want nuclear weapons, it is for the same reason that you do.” Another Iranian citizen had this to say to me: “If nuclear weapons are good, then we should have them. But if they’re bad, then why do you have them?”

I agree with you that war is a last resort. My fear is this: our chronic behavior as a geopolitical bully makes war simply a forgone conclusion. We’ve seen this time and time again throughout history, the most recent being our own country’s military adventures in Iraq. Treating Iran as a 21st Nazi Germany frankly makes war inevitable. Never mind last resort – if the Iranians are Nazis, then there is nothing left for us to do but storm the beaches at Normandy.

If we truly believe that war is a last resort, then we owe it to ourselves to make every effort to make peace. Treating another country as Nazis incarnate is not the way to do that.

First, I’d like to tell you that I agree with much that you have written regarding Iran, the people, and their history.

I know that Iran is not Nazi Germany, but it is the closest national phenomenon to Nazi Germany we have seen since the Second World War. I did not write that Iran is identical to Nazi Germany. That would be historically inaccurate. But a comparison to Nazi Germany is not out of line since Iran does pose an existential threat to Israel, or will do so as soon as they achieve their goal of nuclear weaponization. I don’t, however, support a military attack on Iran’s nuclear sites if any other options are available. I don’t want to see a single Iranian hurt in a war. The military option is, therefore, not one I desire, but it is one that must be considered as a last resort.

I have no issue with the citizens of Iran. Many of them despise the regime, though there are also those who support the extremists in their government.

It’s not about the people. There were Germans who opposed Hitler, yet were powerless to stop him. This Iranian regime is hellbent on a course to fulfill the prophecies in the Qur’an, as they interpret them. In their fervent belief this includes the destruction of the state of Israel.

I don’t have any kind of attitude about Iran, though you impute that to me. I look at the facts and I evaluate what the options are.

You say let us face our fears, and look to the future with hope. I cannot disagree with that sentiment. I have a lot of hope. I am sure that Israel will prevail, and that Iran will not succeed in its stated plan to eradicate the Jewish State.

But I don’t believe that your outreach will have helped in achieving that end. While you are having reconciliation meetings with Shi’a clerics in Iran the Iranian government is feverishly enriching uranium and acquiring ballistic missiles.

What solutions do you propose if all outreach to Iran fails, as is certain as long as this regime remains in power? It falls to our leaders to make those extremely tough decisions.

Rabbi Leo Baeck so sadly regretted his and his colleagues guidance to their congregations in Germany when they told the Jewish people that the Nazi movement constituted no existential threat to them. These rabbis were as sincere as you are, and just as convinced of their own rightness.

You have downplayed the threat that Iran poses to the State of Israel. What if you are wrong? Have you even considered that possibility?

Your comparison of Iran to Nazi Germany is simplistic and historically inaccurate. It is also exceedingly dangerous.

I’ve visited Iran, talked with Iranians and have written extensively about these experiences with the hopes of addressing this complex issue with intelligence and understanding. You claim to know “quite a bit about Iran, its culture, and the Iranian Jewish community,” yet from what I can see, your analysis of the situation amounts to “they want nukes and they want Israel destroyed.”

Do you have any cogent arguments to support your position? Because otherwise, it’s nothing more than incendiary rhetoric.

Enjoy your trip to Iran and we look forward to hearing about the experience when you return.

All the best

http://www.mohammadmossadegh.com/news/rabbi-brant-rosen

Yasher Koach! To go beyond official rhetoric is so important and there is so much to ponder and digest in your sermon.

“Open and honest debate, engagement and dialogue, and peacemaking as sacred Jewish values”. Your knowledge of Iranian history amazes. Thank you.