Uncategorized
Orthodox Union will meet with Israel’s far-right finance minister, while Conservative and Reform movements join call to snub him
WASHINGTON (JTA) — The leading institutions of the Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist movements are among a coalition of liberal Jewish groups calling on American Jews to snub Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s far-right finance minister, when he visits the United States next week.
But the Orthodox Union, an umbrella organization for Orthodox Jews, has confirmed to JTA that it will meet with Smotrich.
The non-Orthodox groups were among more than 70 organizations to sign an open letter denouncing Smotrich. About half of the signatories on the letter, which was published Thursday, are synagogues. It was organized by the Progressive Israel Network, a coalition of groups that support progressive policies in Israel, after Smotrich said earlier this month that a Palestinian village should be “wiped out.” He has since repeatedly walked back the statement.
The Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist umbrella groups represent the vast majority of synagogue-attending U.S. Jews and, in previous years, have welcomed senior Israeli officials to their events. Their presence on the open letter underscores the extent to which Smotrich and his far-right allies have alarmed parts of the organized American Jewish community.
“We pledge to not invite Smotrich to speak at our congregations, organizations, and communal institutions during his visit and to speak out against his participation in other fora across our communities,” the letter says. “We call on all other Jewish communal organizations to join us in this protest as a demonstration of our commitment to our Jewish and democratic values. Our communities must reject Bezalel Smotrich and his party of hate.”
The boycott by the Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist groups stands in contrast to the O.U., whose executive vice president, Rabbi Moshe Hauer, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that he believes Smotrich “will use the opportunity to build greater understanding of and familiarity with the American Jewish community and its institutions.”
“We look forward to welcoming Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich to our offices as part of his forthcoming visit to the United States,” Hauer said in a statement. “We appreciate every opportunity to welcome and interact with Israeli elected officials as it is our responsibility to build mutual familiarity and understanding that will contribute to the deepening and strengthening of the relationship between the State of Israel and American Jewry.”
Another Orthodox group, Agudath Israel of America, has no plans at this time to meet with Smotrich, its Washington director, Rabbi Abba Cohen, told JTA.
Smotrich arrives Sunday to speak to Israel Bonds, which sells Israeli government bonds to investors abroad and is closely tied to the Finance Ministry. Smotrich is also responsible for civilian affairs in parts of the West Bank, which he has called to annex to Israel. He also supports the judicial reform being advanced by the Israeli government, which would sap the Supreme Court of much of its power.
Smotrich has a history of remarks denigrating minorities. But he has drawn especially harsh criticism over the past week and a half after saying that the Israel Defense Forces should “wipe out” a West Bank village, Huwara, where a gunman killed two Israeli brothers. Israeli settlers rioted in Huwara following the attack, burning buildings and cars, and injuring residents. A Palestinian died amid the riots.
In the wake of Smotrich’s statement, the Biden administration said it would not meet with him. In recent days, Smotich has repeatedly walked back the “wipe out” remark, and his latest disavowal came in a lengthy and impassioned Facebook post on Wednesday. Smotrich wrote that a friend who is an Israeli combat pilot explained that Smotrich’s call to destroy Huwara could be taken literally, and that pilots believed they could get orders to bomb the village. Smotrich said his friend linked that concern to a recent decision by 37 reservist combat pilots to boycott part of their training. The main aim of that boycott was to protest the planned judicial reform.
Smotrich said that he meant, at most, that buildings lining the road through Huwara, which is a main West Bank throughway, should be removed.
“And so after I failed in this responsibility, and believe me I am still rattled by the thought that I was understood this way, I must apologize to the army and its commanders, especially to the Air Force, if I was part of a breach of the important trust between the Israel Defense Forces, the army of the people, and the elected political echelon,” Smotrich said.
He added that the experience of being misunderstood by his ideological opponents has made him consider how he may have misjudged those he disagrees with.
“If there is a giant gap between who I am and how I am perceived on ‘the other side,’ to the extent that I could be accused of calling for the murder of women and children, who knows what kind of gap exists between how I perceive people… on the other side, and who and what they really are?” he wrote. “Maybe I make the exact same mistake.”
His apologies have done little to assuage concerns. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, meeting Thursday with Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Galant, alluded to the Smotrich dilemma when he decried inflammatory rhetoric as well as violence by settlers and Palestinian terrorists.
“I am here as a friend who is deeply committed to the security of the State of Israel. The United States also remains firmly opposed to any acts that contribute more insecurity, including settlement expansion, and inflammatory rhetoric,” Austin said. “And we’re especially concerned by violence by settlers against Palestinians.”
A number of other groups are not planning to meet with Smotrich, but would not elaborate further. Most prominent among them is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Haaretz reported Thursday that two rabbis known for their closeness to AIPAC the pro-Israel lobby, have joined protests against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s new government, and Smotrich’s Religious Zionism party in particular. An array of left-leaning Jewish groups is planning to picket Smotrich’s speech.
—
The post Orthodox Union will meet with Israel’s far-right finance minister, while Conservative and Reform movements join call to snub him appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Car Torched in Antwerp in Suspected Antisemitic Attack, Says Belgian Official
A Jewish man rides past Belgian army personnel patrolling a street as part of a deployment of soldiers outside Jewish institutions in Antwerp and Brussels following attacks at Jewish sites in Belgium and other European countries, in Antwerp, Belgium, March 23, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Yves Herman
The torching of a car overnight in Antwerp, for which two minors were arrested, is being treated as a suspected antisemitic attack, a Belgian official said on Tuesday.
European countries including Belgium, the Netherlands, and Britain have witnessed incidents targeting the Jewish community since the United States and Israel launched their war on Iran on Feb. 28.
Belgium on Monday deployed soldiers on the streets of its biggest cities to bolster security at Jewish sites including synagogues and schools.
A spokesperson for the Antwerp prosecutor said an investigation was under way, and that the two suspects had been arrested shortly before midnight on Monday, moments after the attack.
They said a video circulating on social media that purportedly showed the arson attack appeared authentic and was part of the investigation. Reuters did not independently verify the video.
Over the past two weeks, synagogues have been attacked in Liege, Belgium, and in the Dutch city of Rotterdam, as well as a Jewish school in Amsterdam. In Britain, counter-terrorism officers are leading an investigation into an attack on Jewish community ambulances.
“There must be a thorough investigation and decisive action to put an end to this climate of intimidation before it spirals further,” Israel’s ambassador to Belgium, Idit Rosenzweig-Abu, said on X.
The SITE Intelligence website said an Iran-aligned multinational militant collective called Islamic Movement of the People of the Right Hand had claimed responsibility for the attack near a synagogue in Golders Green, London.
It said the group had been behind the fires in Liege, Rotterdam, and Amsterdam.
Mark Rowley, London’s police chief, said the claim was one of the lines of inquiry being pursued.
Uncategorized
Iran Toughens Negotiating Stance Amid Mediation Efforts, Sources Say
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi speaks during a press conference following talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, Dec. 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramil Sitdikov/Pool
Iran’s negotiating posture has hardened sharply since the war began, with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) exerting growing influence over decision-making, and it will demand significant concessions from the United States if mediation efforts lead to serious negotiations, three senior sources in Tehran said.
In any talks with the US, Iran would not only demand an end to the war but concessions that are likely red lines for US President Donald Trump – guarantees against future military action, compensation for wartime losses, and formal control of the Strait of Hormuz, the sources said.
Iran would also refuse to negotiate any limitations to its ballistic missile program, they said, an issue that had been a red line for Tehran during the talks that were taking place when the US and Israel launched their attack last month.
Trump said on Monday that Washington had already had “very, very strong talks” with Tehran more than three weeks into the war, but Iran has publicly denied this.
The three senior sources said Iran had only had preliminary discussions with Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt over whether the groundwork existed for talks with the United States over ending the war.
A European official said on Monday that, while there had been no direct negotiations between Iran and the US, Egypt, Pakistan, and Gulf states were relaying messages. A Pakistani official and a second source also said on Monday that direct talks on ending the war could be held in Islamabad this week.
Pakistan‘s prime minister said on Tuesday he was willing to host talks between the US and Iran on ending the war in the Gulf, a day after Trump postponed threats to bomb Iranian power plants, saying there had been “productive” talks.
However, the US was expected to deploy thousands of troops from the elite 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East, two people familiar with the matter told Reuters on Tuesday, adding to the massive military buildup in the region and fueling fears of a prolonged conflict.
In a post on X, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said Pakistan welcomed and fully supported ongoing efforts to pursue dialogue to end the war.
“Subject to concurrence by the US and Iran, Pakistan stands ready and honored to be the host to facilitate meaningful and conclusive talks for a comprehensive settlement,” he said.
A Pakistani government source said discussions on a meeting were at an advanced stage and if it did happen, “a big ‘if,’” it would take place within a week. Pakistan has long-standing ties to neighboring Iran‘s Islamic Republic and has been building a relationship with Trump.
If any such talks were arranged, Iran would send Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi to attend, the three Iranian sources said, cautioning that any decisions would ultimately lie with the hardline IRGC.
Iran’s use of ballistic missiles and its ability to effectively close the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas usually flows, have been its most effective responses to the US-Israeli strikes.
It could not agree to give these up without leaving itself defenseless against further attacks, analysts say.
Inside Iran, domestic concerns are also constraining Tehran’s maneuvering room in negotiations, the senior Iranian sources said.
These concerns included the greater clout of the Revolutionary Guards, uncertainty at the top of the system, with the new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei having not yet appeared in photographs or video since his appointment, and a public narrative of resilience in the war.
Uncategorized
The JCPOA’s Sunset Has Arrived — and Iran Just Proved It
Deputy Secretary General of the European External Action Service (EEAS) Enrique Mora and Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator Ali Bagheri Kani and delegations wait for the start of a meeting of the JCPOA Joint Commission in Vienna, Austria December 17, 2021. EU Delegation in Vienna/EEAS. Photo: Handout via REUTERS
On the night of March 20-21, 2026, Iran launched two ballistic missiles at the joint US-UK base on Diego Garcia, an atoll in the Indian Ocean nearly 4,000 kilometers from Iranian territory. One failed in flight; the second was intercepted. Neither struck the base.
Iran’s Foreign Minister had stated weeks earlier that Tehran had deliberately capped its missile range at 2,000 kilometers. The gap between that claim and this week’s launch is not merely a military story. It is the story of the Iran nuclear deal (known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — JCPOA), and a direct answer to the question dividing Western foreign policy for a decade: what happens when the world tries to engage diplomatically with Iran?
On July 14, 2015, President Obama announced the JCPOA, and declared: “This deal is not built on trust. It is built on verification. We will be in a position to know if Iran is violating the deal.”
In 2026, that verification looks like a missile fired at a base 4,000 kilometers away, when Iran claimed its range limit was half that distance.
The Iran nuclear deal rested on a core assumption: that Tehran had come clean about its military history. The exposure of Iran’s nuclear archive by the Mossad, presented by Prime Minister Netanyahu in 2018, proved otherwise. Tehran had transferred its ambitions to a classified track, preserving its knowledge base intact and waiting for the restrictions to expire.
The JCPOA’s sunset clauses tell the story plainly. In October 2020, the UN arms embargo expired, allowing Iran to legally purchase tanks and aircraft from Russia and China. In October 2023, all restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile and drone programs expired. In October 2025, the nuclear file was removed from the UN Security Council’s agenda.
Obama acknowledged this in an April 7, 2015 NPR interview with Steve Inskeep: in years 13 through 15, breakout times would shrink toward zero. The deal bought time. The question was always what that time would be used for.
The financial consequences were immediate. Iran gained access to over $100 billion in frozen assets. EU-Iran trade peaked at 20.7 billion euros in 2017. Airbus signed a $19 billion aircraft deal. TotalEnergies signed a $5 billion energy contract. Iran’s GDP grew 12.5 percent in 2016, per IMF data.
When asked in April 2016 whether this windfall would empower the Revolutionary Guard Corps, President Obama, speaking to Jeffrey Goldberg for The Atlantic’s “The Obama Doctrine,” argued that Iran’s infrastructure needs were too vast to leave room for IRGC expansion.
The evidence did not support that premise. The precision-guided munitions transferred to Hezbollah, the drones supplied to the Houthis, and the missile program that reached Diego Garcia were not funded by a government that ran short of money for domestic investment. The capital was fungible, and a revolutionary government proved capable of allocating it accordingly.
In that same interview, Obama called on Saudi Arabia and Iran to share the neighborhood, treating their rivalry as symmetrical rather than as a confrontation between a US partner and a state committed to violently reordering the region.
Within the administration, JCPOA preservation had become the flagship foreign policy achievement, generating a powerful institutional logic: any action risking Iranian withdrawal had to be weighed against losing the agreement. Governments in Jerusalem and Riyadh did not need to be told that escalation carried costs in Washington. Tehran read the architecture with precision. The years between 2015 and 2018 were among the most consequential in the construction of Iran’s regional proxy network.
The deal’s defenders argue, correctly, that it extended Iran’s nuclear breakout time from roughly two months to approximately one year, and that the 2018 withdrawal accelerated the nuclear advances it was meant to prevent. Iran today enriches uranium to 60 percent, a level prohibited under the agreement. These are factual claims.
The harder question is whether the framework was ever capable of a durable outcome. The sunset clauses suggest it was not designed to be. It was designed to buy time. In effect, it risked enabling Iran to reach a nuclear arsenal with international legitimacy. In such a scenario, the Middle East would face a new reality in which Iran possesses nuclear capability and reshapes the regional balance of deterrence. The missiles fired at Diego Garcia offer one answer.
Obama said in 2015 that the best outcome was to place Iran inside a box. The execution rested on assumptions that the nuclear archive, the proxy wars, and the Diego Garcia launch have each challenged in turn.
The next framework will need a different foundation: one that does not schedule its own obsolescence, does not assume capital flows moderate revolutionary ideology, and does not treat military responses to Iranian aggression as threats to diplomatic progress. Building it, before the current conflict forces the question under far worse conditions, is the most urgent task in Western foreign policy today.
Sagiv Steinberg is the CEO of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA), a leading Israeli research institute. He has an extensive background in senior leadership positions across the Israeli and global media landscape.