RSS
As Threats Rise, Israel Must Get Rid of Its Nuclear Ambiguity
Listening to Iran’s repeated threats to initiate aggressive war with Israel, something seems to have been overlooked: Israel is a nuclear power; Iran is not. Iran is hardly in a credible strategic position to make such threats. After all, any actual follow-through on these arguably incoherent threats could produce potentially unendurable Iranian losses.
What is going on here? Why such an ironic disconnect between relative national power capacities and the country issuing existential threats? It seems that in any direct and protracted war with Iran, only Israel would be in a position of “escalation dominance.”
The factor that could substantially change such Israeli superiority would be direct North Korean military involvement. This is because Iran’s belligerent ally in Pyongyang is “already nuclear,” and because Israel is a “fifty target state.” In short, Israel is a geographically small adversary with no meaningful strategic depth. Absent a recognizable nuclear advantage, this is anything but an enviable survival position for an imperiled nation.
The remedy, for Israel, should be an immediate policy shift from “deliberate nuclear ambiguity” (Amimut in Hebrew) to “selective nuclear disclosure.
For decision-makers in Jerusalem, a core commitment of national strategic policy has always been to keep last-resort nuclear assets (aka “The Bomb”) shrouded in the “basement.” Until now, at least, nuclear ambiguity (sometimes called “opacity”) has managed to work. Though this success has seemingly done little to deter ordinary conventional aggressions or criminal acts of terror, it has succeeded in keeping the country’s enemies from launching any conceivable existential aggressions.
How should Israel accurately assess pertinent state and sub-state perils? In all such critical security matters, Israel has no science-based methods to determine useful probabilities. In science, such judgments must stem from the determinable frequency of relevant past events.
There are associated legal issues. Choosing the nuclear option as a last resort would not necessarily be a violation of international law. Among other things, this is because of an International Court of Justice (IJC) Advisory Opinion issued on July 8, 1996. This landmark ICJ ruling concluded that while “the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict….,” this finding might not obtain “in an extreme circumstance of self-defense, in which the very survival of a State would be at stake.”
Nonetheless, the most urgent considerations in any such impending narratives would be broadly operational, not narrowly jurisprudential. In more expressly military nuclear matters, any national security strategy based upon whispered or sotto voce threats would have conspicuous limits. Israel’s longstanding policy of deliberate nuclear ambiguity may not remain persuasive. To be reliably deterred, an Iranian nuclear adversary would require readily verifiable assurances that Israel’s nuclear weapons were effectively (1) invulnerable and (2) “penetration-capable.” This second expectation means that Israel’s nuclear weapons would not only be well-protected from adversarial first-strikes, but would also be able to “get through” Iran’s active defenses.
There is more. Any adversary’s judgments concerning Israel’s willingness to retaliate with nuclear weapons would depend in good measure upon useable foreknowledge of these weapons as well as their presumptive operational capabilities. There would also be some clarifying ironies.
Looking ahead, Iranian perceptions of only mega-destructive, high-yield Israeli nuclear weapons could effectively undermine the credibility of Israel’s nuclear deterrence. Expressed formally, in making such calculations, Israel’s strategic deterrence could sometime vary inversely with the perceived destructiveness of its nuclear arms. While seemingly counter-intuitive, this argument suggests not only that Israel should have available a wide range of nuclear retaliatory options, but also that it should take properly refined steps to ensure that such an expansive range of options be instantly recognizable.
In the future, if Iran should decide to share some of its offensive nuclear assets with a surrogate jihadist terrorist group (e.g., Hezbollah, Hamas, or the Houthis), Jerusalem would need to have prepared for the nuclear deterrence of assorted non-state adversaries. In all such scenarios, what will first need to be calculated, among other things, is the precise extent of subtlety with which Israel should be communicating its nuclear positions, intentions, and capabilities to Iran and various other categories of possible adversaries.
A refined doctrine is necessarily antecedent to any sound nuclear strategy. The core rationale for Israeli nuclear disclosure would inhere in the basic and immutable understanding that nuclear weapons can serve Israel’s security in several specific ways. Once it is faced with a nuclear fait accompli in Tehran or elsewhere, Israel would need to convince its then-relevant enemy or enemies that it possessed both the will and the capacity to make any intended adversarial nuclear aggression more harmful than gainful. By definition, however, no Israeli move from ambiguity to disclosure could help in the unprecedented case of an irrational nuclear enemy.
To protect itself against enemy military strikes, particularly those attacks that could potentially carry authentic existential costs, Israel should quickly and correctly exploit every aspect and function of its still opaque nuclear arsenal. In this connection, the success of Israel’s efforts will depend not only upon its carefully selected configuration of “counterforce” and “counter value” operations, but also on the extent to which this critical choice was made known in advance to Iran and certain Iranian sub-state/terrorist surrogates. The point of any shift from deliberate nuclear ambiguity to selective nuclear disclosure would be to signal that Israel’s “bomb” (1) is safely beyond any preemptive enemy reach; and (2) is calibrated to variously credible levels of enemy aggression.
In essence, removing the bomb from Israel’s basement could enhance the imperiled nation’s strategic deterrence only to the extent that it would heighten enemy perceptions of secure and capable Israeli nuclear forces. Any calculated end to deliberate nuclear ambiguity could also underscore Israel’s presumptive willingness to use its nuclear forces in sudden or incremental reprisal for enemy first-strike and/or retaliatory attacks.
In the final analysis, any Israeli shift from deliberate nuclear ambiguity to selective nuclear disclosure would need to convince Iran of Jerusalem’s ultimate willingness to use nuclear forces against a non-nuclear adversary with exterminatory intentions and capacities.
Though generally misunderstood and inexpertly discussed, a “Samson Option” could gainfully support this obligatory task of Israeli strategic dissuasion. An explicitly-revealed Samson Option would multiply and magnify the survival benefits of selective nuclear disclosure not by threatening gratuitous Israeli spasms of revenge-based harms, but by reminding Iran that Israel’s nuclear force calibrations would be operational even at the 11th-hour.
There is more. In assessing its optimal levels of deliberate nuclear disclosure, Israel should continuously bear in mind the country’s overriding strategic nuclear objective: This goal is deterrence ex ante, not revenge ex post.
If, however, nuclear weapons should somehow be introduced into an impending conflict with Iran (most plausibly, via military participation of North Korea), one form or other of nuclear war fighting could ensue. This conclusion would be unassailable so long as: (a) enemy state first strike attacks against Israel would not destroy the Jewish State’s second-strike nuclear capability; (b) enemy state retaliations for Israeli conventional preemption would not destroy Israel’s nuclear counter-retaliatory capability; (c) Israeli strikes would not destroy enemy state second-strike nuclear capabilities; and (d) Israeli retaliations for enemy state conventional first strikes would not destroy enemy state nuclear counter-retaliatory capacities. This means that Israel should promptly take appropriately steps to ensure the likelihood of (a) and (b), above, and the reciprocal unlikelihood of (c) and (d).
If for any reason Iranian nuclear deployments were permitted to take place, Israel could forfeit any non-nuclear preemption options. At that stage, Jerusalem’s only remaining alternatives to exercising a nuclear preemption option would be: (1) a no-longer viable conventional preemption; or (2) a decision to do nothing preemptively, thereby choosing to existentially rely upon some form or other of nuclear deterrence and the corollary protections of ballistic missile defense. Ipso facto, any prior decisions having to do with tangible shifts to “selective nuclear disclosure” and also a “Samson Option” would be all important.
For Israel, the time to end its traditional policy of “deliberate nuclear ambiguity” is now. The intellectually lazy argument that it has worked thus far and would therefore work in the future is a classic example of logical fallacy at its worst.
Left unrevised by a more carefully calculated and prudent Israeli nuclear policy, such fallacious reasoning could produce largely unimaginable levels of human harm. As all humans are ultimately creatures of biology, it could even bring millions into the predatory embrace of a “final epidemic.”
Louis René Beres was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971) and is the author of many books, monographs, and scholarly articles dealing with military nuclear strategy. In Israel, he was Chair of Project Daniel. Over recent years, he has published on nuclear warfare issues in Harvard National Security Journal (Harvard Law School); Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists; International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence; Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs; and more.
The post As Threats Rise, Israel Must Get Rid of Its Nuclear Ambiguity first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Belgian Prime Minister Shows Solidarity With Jewish Community, Calls for Caution on Palestinian State Recognition
Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever attends a press conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured), at the Chancellery, in Berlin, Germany, Aug. 26, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Annegret Hilse
Amid rising antisemitism across Europe and increasing hostility toward Israel from several European governments, Prime Minister Bart De Wever expressed Belgium’s sympathy and respect for the Jewish community this week, honoring the millions of victims of the Holocaust.
During his trip to Berlin on Tuesday, De Wever visited the Holocaust Memorial and left a moving message in its guestbook.
“On behalf of the Belgian government and all people and communities living together in peace in Belgium, I express my deepest sympathy and my respect,” the Belgian leader wrote in a note in German.
“We will remember all the victims. I stand here humbly at this place of remembrance. The Jewish community will always have a home in Europe,” he continued.
Rabbi Menachem Margolin, chairman of the European Jewish Association (EJA), commended De Wever’s remarks and his support for the Jewish community, highlighting his leadership as a model.
“We sincerely thank Prime Minister De Wever for his moving message in Berlin. At a time when antisemitism is once again spreading across Europe, his clear and unwavering statement that the Jewish community will always have a home here is deeply important,” Margolin said in a statement.
“Such leadership not only honors the memory of the six million victims of the Holocaust but also strengthens the sense of security and belonging for Jews in Belgium and across the continent,” he continued.
“We also commend the Prime Minister’s principled leadership on Israel, where he consistently calls for security guarantees and a realistic path to peace. His voice carries moral weight in Europe, and we deeply appreciate it.”
During a visit to the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in Berlin, Belgian Prime Minister @Bart_DeWever left an important message in the guestbook. Written in German, his note expressed Belgium’s sympathy and respect for the Jewish community and commemorated the millions… pic.twitter.com/ZcuEfKCavi
— EJA – EIPA (@EJAssociation) August 26, 2025
During his visit to Berlin, De Wever met with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to discuss the recent push by several European countries to recognize a Palestinian state at next month’s UN General Assembly.
At a joint press conference, De Wever stressed that recognizing a Palestine state is only meaningful under strict conditions, warning that doing so without such guarantees would be “pointless and even counterproductive.”
“Hamas must disappear completely, there must be a credible Palestinian Authority, an agreement must be reached on borders, and Israel must receive security guarantees. Without that, recognition makes no sense,” De Wever said.
In Belgium, De Wever’s more cautious approach to Palestinian statehood and support for Israel have fueled clashes within the government, with Foreign Minister Maxime Prévot threatening to block government initiatives if the coalition continues to hinder a firmer stance on Israel and the recognition of a Palestinian state.
“If there is no stronger tone within the government regarding the human rights violations committed by the Israeli government, or if no measures are taken in favor of recognizing Palestine, a major crisis is looming,” Prévot said during an interview with De Standaard.
RSS
Amid War, Olim-Owned Businesses in Jerusalem Thrive, Showcasing Resilience, Community Spirit
Olim gather at JFK Airport, ready to board a charter flight to Israel and begin their new lives in the Jewish state. Photo: The Algemeiner
JERUSALEM — Despite the strains of war and the obstacles of starting over in a new country, businesses in Jerusalem owned by Jewish immigrants are thriving — a testament to resilience, Zionist commitment, and the power of community.
New immigrants, or olim, who make aliyah to Israel face steep challenges even in times of peace, navigating strict regulations, endless permits, and financial hurdles, though the Israeli government offers some support and incentives to promote new businesses.
Aliyah refers to the process of Jews immigrating to Israel, and olim refers to those who make this journey.
In recent years, the road has become even more difficult for entrepreneurs, first with the economic disruption of COVID-19 and now amid the uncertainty of the war in Gaza.
For many olim, launching a business in Israel is about more than entrepreneurship — it’s a way to start a new life, serve their country, build a community, and make a meaningful impact.
Last week, 225 new olim arrived in Tel Aviv on the first charter aliyah flight since the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Nefesh B’Nefesh (NBN) — a nonprofit that promotes and facilitates aliyah from the US and Canada — brought its 65th charter flight from New York, which The Algemeiner joined.
Founded in 2002, NBN helps olim become fully integrated members of Israeli society, simplifying the immigration process and providing essential resources and guidance.
In partnership with Israel’s Ministry of Aliyah and Integration, the Jewish Agency for Israel, Keren Kayemeth, and the Jewish National Fund, NBN has helped nearly 100,000 olim build thriving new lives in Israel.
Eager to start their next chapter in Israel, these immigrants bring fresh ideas, culinary creativity, and cultural richness, strengthening the country’s social fabric every day.
Originally from New Orleans, Louisiana, Diana Shapira brought her passion for baking and warm hospitality to Israel, turning her aliyah dream into a popular destination for both locals and tourists.
She and her husband created Infused JLM, located near Jerusalem’s Mahaneh Yehuda Market, blending American and Israeli culture and creating a space that brings people together.
“We want people to see that an oleh’s dream can happen,” Shapira told The Algemeiner. “Even without family and facing many challenges, starting a business in Israel is possible — especially when you have the support of the community.”
“Before we made aliyah, so many people told us it was a bad financial decision. But you have to push past the doubt and keep striving,” she continued.
Another olim-owned business located in Jerusalem, Power CoffeeWorks, has become a favorite destination for coffee enthusiasts across the city.
Owned by Stephanie and Brandon, who made aliyah from Cape Town, South Africa, in 2016 with their four children at the time (now seven), the couple has turned their venture into a hub for coffee lovers and a gathering place for the community.
“We made aliyah because we believed Israel was the best place to raise our children,” Stephanie told The Algemeiner. “Despite all the challenges along the way, it has been an incredible journey.”
Crave, another oleh-owned restaurant in Mahaneh Yehuda, has gained increasing attention with its strictly kosher gourmet street food, blending American, Mexican, and Asian flavors in a way that hasn’t been seen before.
American-born Yoni Van Leeuwen, who made aliyah more than 20 years ago with his wife and eight children, views food not just as a business, but as a way to bring cultures and communities together.
Following the Oct. 7 atrocities, the war in Gaza dealt a harsh blow to Israeli businesses, forcing many to cut hours, adapt operations, and manage shortages.
Yet these olim-owned establishments have shown resilience, proving that passion, creativity, and commitment to the Zionist dream can overcome even the toughest challenges.
Whether by serving comfort food, offering a safe space for neighbors, or organizing fundraisers for soldiers in Gaza and Lebanon, these business owners described a spirit of perseverance deeply rooted in Jewish history.
RSS
Police in England Investigate Air Rifle Attack Against Jewish Teenager, Swastika Spray Painted at Rabbi’s Home
Friday night saw a string of swastika vandalism resulting in four reports, including from Rabbi Bentzion Alperowitz, a Chabad leader who discovered the Nazi symbol spray painted in black on his home’s white wall as he left for synagogue the next morning with his two young daughters. Photo: Screenshot
Multiple antisemitic incidents reported this past weekend targeted the Jewish community of Bournemouth in the southern region on the coast of the United Kingdom.
On Saturday afternoon, a driver stopped to harass and yell obscenities at two pedestrians before shooting one, a Jewish teenage boy, in the forehead with an air rifle and fleeing. The victim suffered swelling but has otherwise recovered.
“Detectives are leading the investigation to locate the occupants of the vehicle and to establish the full circumstances of the incident,” a spokesman for Dorset Police said. “The incident is being treated as a hate crime. Officers are engaging with the local community and carrying out patrols in the area. We would encourage anyone with information or concerns to please speak with an officer.”
Rabbi Alan Lewis, who leads the Bournemouth Hebrew Congregation, said that “the young man who was shot is a religious Jew who was wearing a skull cap. It was very obvious he was Jewish. Then several people living on Manor Road woke up to find that swastikas had been painted on their homes. The homes had a mezuzah outside, so it was obvious that Jewish people lived there.”
Friday night saw a string of swastika vandalism resulting in four reports, including from Rabbi Bentzion Alperowitz, a Chabad leader who discovered the Nazi symbol spray painted in black on his home’s white wall as he left for synagogue the next morning with his two young daughters.
“We will continue to live as proud Jews here in Bournemouth … I want to encourage everyone to do exactly the same,” Alperowitz said. “This is not the Bournemouth I know. Bournemouth is a kind, beautiful place and I feel this is still the truth for the vast majority of people here.”
Other members of the Jewish community came to assist the rabbi with removing the graffiti.
“[The] good news is that by the time you’re watching this video our wall will have been cleaned, thanks to some amazing people from the community, who came around to help clean it,” Alperowitz said.
Author Dov Forman wrote that “on Saturday morning, my friend Rabbi Benzion Alperowitz of Bournemouth Chabad walked outside to find a swastika on his home. Antisemitism is alive on our streets, yet it is too often excused and ignored. But it will not break us. We will continue to live proudly as Jews.”
Law enforcement has reportedly stepped up patrols in the town’s Jewish neighborhoods which include an estimated 2,000 people.
On Monday, the Community Security Trust (CST), an organization focused on monitoring antisemitic threats in the UK, released a statement saying that it was “appalled by a series of anti-Jewish hate crimes in Bournemouth over the weekend. These are abhorrent acts of racism that are deeply distressing for the Jewish community and should alarm everybody. We are supporting the local Jewish community and working with Dorset Police to assist their investigation. We urge anyone with information about these incidents to contact the police and CST.”
CST released a report of antisemitic incidents in the UK during 2024, finding 3,528 — the second highest ever — showing an 18-percent decrease from the all-time high of 4,296 in 2023.
Earlier this month, CST released a separate report noting the group recorded 1,521 antisemitic incidents in the UK from January to June of this year. It marks the second-highest total of incidents ever recorded by CST in the first six months of any year, following the first half of 2024 in which 2,019 antisemitic incidents were recorded in the aftermath of the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack on Israel.
“These hateful attacks on people and property in Bournemouth are extremely concerning. We have been informed that the police are investigating and hope that the perpetrators will be arrested and face the full force of the law,” Andrew Gilbert, vice president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, said in a statement.
Maurice Michaels, who served as rabbi at Bournemouth Reform Synagogue, said that the community felt “very pressurized and anxious.” He added, “We’re getting terrified calls from people across the UK asking, ‘Is this really happening in Bournemouth?’ I’d never go out wearing my usual skull cap, I don’t show outward signs of being Jewish. I know community members who have even removed their mezuzah from their front door.”
Michaels described the antisemitic crimes as “a measure of what’s going on across the country, demonstrations where people cover their faces. They don’t want to be recognized because they know what they’re doing is wrong. We do the best we can to secure our safety. But when people attack our homes, when they shoot pellets — it gets to a point where it’s no longer a manageable situation. We’re frightened.”