JNS.org – Two years have passed since the murder of Jina (“Mahsa”) Amini, a young Kurdish-Iranian woman, at the hands of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s morality police. Amini was brutalized and killed for allegedly wearing her hijab, or head-covering, improperly—the sort of “crime” that sends a backward theocracy apoplectic with rage. Her death sparked the “Women, Life, Freedom” movement, the latest and perhaps most significant wave of protest among the millions of ordinary Iranians who have been clamoring for regime change for well over a decade, but who have so far been unable to dislodge the ruling mullahs.

Those ruling mullahs duly rolled into New York City last week to attend the U.N. General Assembly. Iran’s new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, addressed a gathering largely dominated by Third World kleptocrats, and various Russian and Chinese stooges, on the same day as Turkey, Jordan, South Africa and Qatar did the same—all of whom delivered viciously anti-Israel speeches laced with antisemitic tropes from the General Assembly podium. Pezeshkian’s remarks stuck rigidly to his regime’s talking points, among them the conspiracy theory that ISIS was created by Israel; that Iran’s proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthi rebels in Yemen are “popular liberation movements”; and, most laughably of all, the contention that Iran only “seeks to safeguard its own security, not to create insecurity for others. We want peace for all and seek no war or quarrel with anyone.”

The fate of Amini and the thousands of protesters who followed in her wake went unmentioned. Rather inconveniently, around the time that Pezeshkian was extolling Iran’s peaceful nature, Reuters broke the story that the Iranians have been mediating secret talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin’s regime and the Houthis with the aim of supplying the latter with Russian-made Yakhont missiles to continue their attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea. But this, too, passed unnoticed and unmentioned at the U.N. circus, where the only “rogue state” judged worthy of that appellation is the State of Israel.

Outside the environs of the General Assembly, the Iranian delegation conducted some public diplomacy, hosting a meeting of religious figures that included a smattering of Jewish attendees. Contrary to the assessment of the correspondent of Israel’s liberal Haaretz newspaper, this wasn’t remotely “surprising.” With the predictability of the earth revolving around the sun, at every General Assembly, a delegation of the anti-Zionist Neturei Karta sect dutifully meets with the Iranians at whichever Manhattan hotel they happen to be staying at. Whether we should consider Jews who traffic in Holocaust distortion, and who spend every Jewish Sabbath in the ranks of the Hamas mob that devotes its weekends to demonstrating in favor of Israel’s elimination, to be Jews in the sense that the vast majority of us understand the term is beyond the scope of this week’s column. What matters for these purposes is that this year was no different from past years.

More noteworthy was the presence of an Israeli—Lior Sternfeld, a professor of history and Jewish studies at Pennsylvania State University—at that “dialogue.” Sternfeld is hardly the first Israeli to have met with representatives of the Islamic Republic, despite the impression conveyed by the media coverage of this encounter; to cite one example, Moti Maman, a 73-year-old Israeli businessman who went on trial in Israel last week charged with plotting terrorist actions and assassinations on Tehran’s behalf, traveled to Iran on at least two occasions. I’m not suggesting that Sternfeld was being recruited to carry out similar work, but whether he realizes it or not, he has become a useful propaganda tool for the Iranians, gushing following his meeting with Pezeshkian, “Are there new faces in Iran? The answer is yes.” Sternfeld would have us believe, on the basis of a choreographed encounter, that Pezeshkian is a genuine moderate who wants to orchestrate a deal that would secure the release of the 101 Israeli hostages still languishing in Hamas captivity in Gaza. But literally everything that Iran’s current rulers say and do—domestically, regionally and globally—flies in the face of that conclusion.

The overriding point is this: More than anything else, the U.N. General Assembly projects a worldview in which pretty much every member state is law-abiding, peace-loving and respectful of human rights—with the exception of Israel. So it’s not exactly shocking that Iran slides with ease into those parameters, as do other states like Turkey, which over the last century has conducted genocides against Armenians and Kurds, and Qatar, where just 10% of the population are fully-fledged citizens, and the remainder are disenfranchised slaves and domestic servants imported from developing countries. If some on the Jewish left aspire to be accepted in these circles, then that, frankly, is their funeral. Let them conduct their “dialogue.” Doing so won’t liberate a single hostage nor persuade Israelis that they are the wronging party and not the wronged.

After all, the vast majority of Jews who identify as Zionists and pray fervently for an Israeli victory in the present multi-front war also have partners and sympathizers. The Iranian people, who risk the death penalty every time they defy their regime by chanting that the cause of Gaza is not their cause. The Kurds, who know better than anyone the brutality of Arab domination and Arab colonization of their homeland. The other religious minorities of the Middle East—from the Yazidis of Iraq to the Christians of Lebanon and Egypt, who reject the misery of life in a state ruled by Islamic Shari’a law. They are our partners in conversation and in the broader project of reconstructing the Middle East as an open society.

We don’t need to engage with Pezeshkian and his cohorts, nor do we seek their approval. What we seek is their overthrow. And I’m willing to bet, as we approach a New Year that will hopefully be kinder and gentler than the previous year, that a decade from now, Israel will still be thriving, and that it is the mullahs who are far more likely to have been consigned to the past. With that in mind, as we gear up for the struggles and battles of the coming months, allow me to sign off with a heartfelt Shanah Tovah.

The post When It Comes to Iran’s Rulers, There Can Be No Dialogue first appeared on Algemeiner.com.