We’re propagandized incessantly about anti-Semitism and “Islamism”—terms without stable definitions—but there turns out not to be any terminology in the English language to describe the forcible displacement of a whole population on sectarian grounds by a Jewish State, even if that State has spent its entire history and pre-history doing just that, and invokes an elaborate ideology to rationalize it. The predictable result is that we have words for things we can’t define, but lack words for things that keep recurring. The first thing leads to snap judgments, the second, to blindness about the obvious. Continue reading
Tag Archives: Israel
Dire Strait
Consider one of the antinomies, or self-contradictions, of international relations.
For decades now, the conventional wisdom in international relations has held that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz was a low probability event, and that if it happened, it could very likely be dealt with by the U.S. Navy. For documentation and a literature review, see Caitlin Talmadge’s paper, “Closing Time: Assessing the Iranian Threat to the Strait of Hormuz,” International Security, vol. 33:1 (Summer 2008), pp. 82-117. Continue reading
Expel ROTC Now
Statement at Firestone Plaza
Princeton University
March 18, 2026
Hi, my name is Irfan Khawaja; I’m an alum of the Class of 1991. I’m affiliated with Princeton Alumni for Palestine, the alumni wing of the Princeton Palestine movement, but I’m speaking here for myself.
Like many of you, I have friends and family “over there,” in Jerusalem, the West Bank, Beirut, and the Gulf. Every morning now, I enact the same macabre ritual of looking at my phone to discover who’s been arrested, who’s been shot, who’s been bombed, who’s dead. And it’s not an idle question. At last count, Ahmad had been shot, Amer had been abducted and left for dead in the desert, Maha is likely not answering my calls because she’s been bombed or displaced from Beirut, and Naeem says he’s OK but is likely being deliberately insouciant about what’s going on. Continue reading
The Power and the Glory
Imagine a society in the grips of civil war. On one side stand the partisans of theocracy; on the other, the partisans of secularism. As they fight over their country, a larger imperial power decides to invade, citing as justification the apparent approval of (a faction of) the secular side, along with the inherent evils of theocracy. Taking advantage of the smaller country’s internal division and weakness, the imperial power then tears the country to pieces that neither side will ever be able to govern. Besieging, starving, and massacring the people it claims to be liberating, the imperialists eventually conquer the place, lording it over the defeated population. They then spend the next several centuries singing their own praises–until they, too, are defeated by a rival power and swept away. Continue reading
We’re Going to Need a Bigger Anti-War Movement
The US-Israeli war on Iran is two weeks old, and getting worse every day. So far, the anti-war movement’s response has been salutary, but muted. A lot of astute commentators deserve credit for saying a lot of the right things, but as far as visible public outcry is concerned, we’ve fallen short.
I split my time between Princeton and West Orange, New Jersey. We had a smallish anti-war rally in Princeton on the first day of the war, sponsored by the local Coalition for Peace Action and Indivisible; 180 people showed up in Hinds Plaza, and we got some modest but positive local news coverage across the following week. There was a small follow-up rally a few days later at Princeton’s War Memorial, and then some canvassing with Adam Hamaway, a local anti-war candidate for Congress. A vigil and a demonstration are scheduled for next week at the University, organized by some of the student groups there. A respectable but hardly overwhelming display. Continue reading
Malley and Wertheim on Iranian “Responsibility”
When people commit crimes, they often invent elaborate rationalizations to conceal or dilute the moral turpitude of the offense. Rapists notoriously claim that their victims asked to be raped, or enjoyed it during the act. Murderers cite the imperatives of retributive justice. Etc. When it comes to ordinary crimes, most people can see the gaslighting involved for the deception it is. Unfortunately, this tends not to be true of crimes by nation-states. A nation-state can commit an obvious, egregious crime in the plain light of day, lie about it in an obvious way, and be believed by millions of people. Continue reading
“The Iran War Is Unfathomably Depraved”
Notes on War and Complicity
There are many valuable criticisms and critiques of the Iran War out there, and at some point I hope to mention as many of them here as I can, but if you want one-stop shopping, the thing to read is Nathan Robinson’s “The Iran War Is Unfathomably Depraved” in the March 2026 issue of Current Affairs. I agree with literally everything in Robinson’s article except this one sentence:
We are all complicit.
No, we’re not. Continue reading
The Fog of War
An Israeli security analyst on the supposed virtues of Israeli military strategy:
When you are the one initiating–not the one caught off guard–you can fight a war on two fronts more effectively,” said Sarit Zehavi, an Israeli analyst who studied Hezbollah for over 20 years, first as an Israeli intelligence officer, then as the head of Alma, an Israeli defense think tank focusing on Syria and Lebanon (“Israel’s plans in Lebanon, prepared well in advance, include the option of a deeper incursion, officials say,” The New York Times, March 3, 2026).
Something equally obvious: when “you are the one initiating,” you’re the one engaged in aggression, and you’re the one who forfeits any right of self-defense. So the advantage you gain in strategy is one you lose in morality, which translates to a loss of sympathy in a lot of people, including the ones you call “allies.” Continue reading
This Be the Hearse
David French on the “legal and moral justifications for war” against Iran:
There is little question that we have many legal and moral justifications for war. When Trump spoke about Americans killed by Iranian-backed militias in Iraq, that struck home for me. We lost men in my own unit to Iranian-backed militias using Iranian-supplied munitions. I knew those men, and I will never forget the terrible days when they fell.
In other words, twenty years ago, the United States initiated a war of aggression against Iraq premised on florid, systematic lies. The victims fought back, killing some of the aggressors. In answer to those acts of self-defense, we’re now obliged to initiate yet another war of aggression, this time against Iran, eliciting yet another round of defensive attacks by the successors of yesteryear’s victims. Continue reading
Iran as a “War of Choice”
Wherever you go, you’ll find imperialist wars described, particularly by their self-styled liberal opponents, as “wars of choice.” Having described a given war as a “war of choice,” the critic will then go on to criticize it as ill-conceived and ill-executed while conceding the underlying reason for going to war. The unspoken implication is that the same war, conceived and executed more competently, would have been perfectly justified. It’s just that this particular iteration is not. Continue reading
Policy of Truth 