The Tikvah Podcast

Last week, Michael Smuss died at age ninety-nine. Born in 1926, he was the last surviving fighter of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. His passing marks the end of an era, and brings to a close a chapter of living memory. Now the responsibility to tell this story passes fully to us. In the spring of 1943, against impossible odds and with almost no weapons, a small group of young Jews in Nazi-occupied Warsaw staged a revolt that would reverberate through history. This was not just a military engagement, but a story of Jewish resistance, dignity, and moral choice under unimaginable circumstances. Before the war, Warsaw was home to nearly 400,000 Jews—the largest Jewish community in Europe. This was a vibrant, diverse Jewish population: workers and intellectuals, religious and secular, Yiddish-speakers and Polish-speakers. Jews published daily newspapers, ran theaters, fielded soccer teams. They were 40 percent of Warsaw's population. Then came September 1939. Within weeks, Warsaw fell to the Germans. Over the next year, the Nazis systematically stripped Jews of their rights—blocked bank accounts, forced them to wear special armbands, and conscripted them into slave labor. In November 1940, they sealed 400,000 Jews into a ghetto of just two square miles, then forced in 150,000 more from nearby towns and cities. With official rations of just 184 calories per day and no heating, 100,000 Jews died of starvation and disease. But 80 percent stayed alive through extraordinary resourcefulness—smuggling food, establishing soup kitchens, creating underground factories. This too was resistance. In July 1942, the Germans began mass deportations to Treblinka, where most were murdered upon arrival. Over seven weeks, they sent 300,000 Jews to the gas chambers, with the help of a Jewish police force. By September, only 60,000 remained. At that point, something shifted. Survivors asked why they hadn't fought back. The shame and anger became a catalyst. Between September and April, the ghetto prepared. They built 750 bunkers with electricity, water, and food stocks. When the Germans came on April 19, 1943, expecting to round up the Jews with no resistance, they were met with gunfire, grenades, and mines. The Germans thought it would take three days. It took 27—because the entire community had transformed the ghetto into a network of underground revolt. To tell this story, Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver is joined by Professor Samuel Kassow of Trinity College. They discuss the courage of the fighters as well as the resistance of those who built the bunkers, who preserved cultural life, who maintained their dignity in ways that have largely been forgotten. They also confront difficult questions about heroism, survival, and how to fulfill the sacred obligations of remembering.

Now that there is a fragile cease-fire in place, it's time to ask what to do with Gaza's intricate system of tunnels. There is, of course, nothing new about the use of tunnels in war. From ancient Jerusalem to Vietnam to Islamic State in Mosul, militaries have dealt with underground warfare for millennia. But the scale, purpose, and strategic role of Hamas's tunnel network is fundamentally different from anything we've seen before. Gaza is approximately 140 square miles, and there are at least 600 miles of tunnels below its terrain. Before the war began, there were likely more tunnels in Gaza than there were roads. But it's not just the density of Gaza's tunnels that is unprecedented. For the first time in history, a military force built its entire strategy around its subterranean defenses, deliberately constructing tunnels beneath civilian infrastructure—schools, hospitals, homes—not to protect civilians, but to use them as human shields. This wasn't merely a tactical decision; it was the primary means by which Hamas intended to achieve its political goals. John Spencer, a leading expert on urban warfare and military history and executive director of the Urban Warfare Institute, joins the Tikvah Podcast to discuss this unprecedented military challenge. He has visited Gaza six times since October 7, studying these tunnels firsthand and speaking with the Israeli commanders who've had to fight in them. Today, he walks us through how Israeli forces had to remap the battlefield and reimagine warfare, learning to fight simultaneously above and below ground. We'll discuss the psychological demands of entering these tunnels, the innovative tactics that turned Hamas's greatest defensive asset into an Israeli offensive advantage, and the immense challenge that remains: what do you do with hundreds of miles of tunnels now that active hostilities have paused?

"God created man in His image: in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." Thus reads verse 27 of the first chapter of Genesis, one of the most important lines ever written in history. The Hebrew phrase rendered as "in God's image" is b'tselem Elohim, and that is the title of a new book that traces the extraordinary career of this concept, known in Latin as imago Dei, throughout the course of Western civilization. Written by Tomer Persico, a research fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute, the book is the biography of the idea that all human beings—not just kings or heroes—are created in the image and likeness of God. At the heart of the book is a deep irony: the religious idea of imago Dei contains within it the seeds of secularization; this religious innovation developed into a concept that would marginalize religion itself. The very emphasis on individual conscience and human equality that Judaism and Christianity cultivated eventually led to further questioning of law, and then authority, and then even the disciplines of religious life. That is, over the course of millennia, one of God's pronouncements led some to question God's providence and even God's existence. Now, if you're listening as an orthodox believer or theological traditionalist, you may be tempted to object: surely modern secularism represents a betrayal of the biblical depiction of the human condition, not an outgrowth of it, and there is much truth to that position. But Persico's argument is directed primarily at the committed liberal democrat who believes deeply in individual rights, human dignity, and equality, but who may not realize where these convictions come from. To that person, Persico seems to be arguing: even you, especially you, are an inheritor of a biblical idea. Your deepest moral commitments didn't spring from nowhere. They have a genealogy that begins in Genesis. On today's podcast Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver sits down with Persico to discuss what all this implies.  

On September 17, 2025, Israel announced that the world's first laser defense system was ready for deployment, and was being integrated into its multitiered missile-defense shield. Iron Beam may be the most significant advance in missile defense since Israel pioneered the concept of intercepting missiles with missiles back in the 1980s. That's because Iron Beam promises to solve one of modern warfare's most vexing problems: the economic asymmetry of defense. When a crude, unguided rocket costing a few thousand dollars must be stopped with an interceptor costing between $50,000 and $100,000, the math quickly becomes unsustainable. The scale of rocket, drone, and missile fire into Israel over the last two years, coupled with the yet-unlaunched arsenals that Iran and her proxies have in reserve, would, if each one needed to be defended by traditional interceptors, cripple Israel's economy. But Iron Beam changes that calculus entirely. Rather than the $40,000–$50,000 interceptor, each laser interception costs roughly two dollars—the price of the electricity that powers it. The system has what military officials call an "endless magazine," capable of firing continuously as long as it has power. It's already battle-tested, shooting down over 40 drones from Lebanon during recent conflicts. But this breakthrough also raises profound questions. Israel's intelligence failures on October 7, 2025 partly stemmed from an overreliance on technological solutions—the belief that smart fences and surveillance systems could replace human judgment and offensive action. As Israel celebrates this remarkable achievement of military innovation, how do we ensure Iron Beam enhances rather than replaces sound strategic thinking? To discuss these questions, Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver is joined by Yaakov Katz, former editor of the Jerusalem Post and author of the new book While Israel Slept. Together, they explore what Iron Beam means for Israel's defense, for military cooperation between Israel and America, and the future of warfare.

What mattered most for survivors of the Holocaust, indeed, what made their survival possible, was not only that the Allies had better ideas about democracy and civilization, though of course Britain, America, and the other Western Allies did. It was that they actually won the war. They defeated the Germans on the field of battle—on sea, land, and air, in the hills and in the streets. It's not enough for us to rest contentedly on the superiority of our ideas. We also have to fight. But at this moment, the fundamental political fact of the last 80 years—that it was an indispensable and untarnishable achievement for the Allies to have destroyed the Third Reich—is itself under revisionist assault. The Internet talk-show host Tucker Carlson last year promoted the podcaster Darryl Cooper, calling him "America's most honest historian," and airing his claim that Winston Churchill was the "chief villain" of World War II who "escalated" what Hitler supposedly intended to be a limited conflict. As one of this episode's guests reports in the Wall Street Journal, when the Holocaust-denying podcaster Jake Shields polled his social-media followers about who they thought was "the biggest villain of World War II," 40.3 percent chose Churchill over Hitler (25.3 percent) or Stalin (25.9 percent). Darryl Cooper or Jake Shields are teaching a new generation of Americans a grotesquely distorted view of our own history. To understand why that is, what can be done about it, and what's at stake for Jews and America, Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver sat down Rabbi Meir Soloveichik and Andrew Roberts. Roberts is a distinguish historian and the author of more than twenty books. His 2018 biography of Churchill, Walking with Destiny, was the rare work that deserved all of the glowing praise it received, and there is perhaps no person living who knows more about the 20th century's greatest man than Roberts. On November 1, 2022, he was elevated to a peerage as Baron Roberts of Belgravia. Rabbi Soloveichik is the religious leader of Congregation Shearith Israel, the director of the Straus Center for Torah and Western Thought and Yeshiva University, and vice-chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. This conversation took place at a private event held for members of the Tikvah Society. You can learn more about its activities and how to join here.

The relationship between the United States and Israel has long been the subject of intense scrutiny, very often distorted by polemic and conspiracy. One of the most influential articulations of these distortions came in 2007, when the political scientists John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt argued that American foreign policy had been hijacked by a powerful Israel lobby—an argument that, despite its weaknesses, has shaped how many Americans view relations between these two nations. My guest today, the historian and policy scholar Daniel Samet, has written a new book that aims to set the record straight. Drawing on archival research and much evidence, Samet demonstrates that U.S. policy toward Israel during the cold war was not the product of special pleading and manipulation, but of America's own strategic interests. By examining presidencies from Harry Truman through George H.W. Bush, he shows how American leaders, whatever their personal sympathies, consistently acted to advance U.S. national priorities—and how Israel sometimes fit into that strategy, and sometimes did not. In this episode of the Tikvah Podcast, Samet joins the host and editor of Mosaic Jonathan Silver to discuss how Israel was perceived in Washington during America's long struggle with the Soviet Union, what lessons that history holds for America's rivalry with China today, and why misconceptions about the "Israel lobby" persist in our political discourse. Daniel Samet is a Jean Kirkpatrick Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where he works on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. His book, U.S. Defense Policy Toward Israel, was published earlier this year.

In the span of just twelve days, the strategic balance of the Middle East was fundamentally altered. Israel systematically dismantled Iran's drones, missiles, and air defenses, while American strikes turned its most important nuclear facilities into dust. But for all of that, another aspect of the war may not yet have gotten enough attention, and that is the demonstration of what American energy dominance can make possible. What does it mean that oil did not rise over $100 per barrel, as some predicted it might, and how did American policymakers ensure that it didn't? The answer to that question lies in part in the creation in February 2025 of the National Energy Dominance Council (NEDC). Our guest today is Richard Goldberg, a senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who recently served as senior counselor to the NEDC. In conversation with Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver, Goldberg examines what he calls "a National Security Council for energy," its role in crafting a whole-of-government approach to coordinating American energy policy, and what it tells us about President Trump's vision for American power. We are currently living through a three-way strategic competition among the United States, China, and Iran for influence in the Middle East—and energy is the battleground. China is pouring billions into its Belt and Road infrastructure projects across the region while buying Iranian oil in defiance of sanctions. Iran is using energy revenues to fund proxy networks from Iraq to Yemen, threatening the very shipping lanes that global commerce depends on. The Trump administration's answer is to turn American energy abundance into a strategic weapon. To this end, it has signed an energy- and AI-cooperation agreement with Israel—designed to combine Israeli innovation with American infrastructure to dominate the technologies of the future. The administration is also working to cut off Iran's energy lifelines, ending waivers that allowed Iraq to buy Iranian oil and gas. It's also pushing massive infrastructure projects like the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor that would run through Israel and bypass both Iranian threats and Chinese influence. Coordinating and advancing these policies is the work of the NEDC, and Goldberg was in the room during the twelve-day war and the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, as well as for the signing of that unprecedented U.S.-Israel energy-cooperation agreement during Prime Minister Netanyahu's July visit to Washington. Now that he no longer holds public office, he can talk about the experience.

This week, as students in North America are returning to campus and settling into the rhythms of the fall semester, some of them are going to open their copies of Homer's epic poems of the Trojan War, the Iliad and Odyssey. They will read of the Trojan commander Hector's poignant farewell to his wife Andromache, of the Greek warrior Achilles' terrible rage, of Odysseus' long journey home, and of his wife in Ithaca, Penelope, who has endured his absence for some twenty years. For many students, these will be powerful stories—windows into an ancient world of honor and virtue and hubris—but for all that, distant stories. When read from the air-conditioned dorm room or plush campus library, the dust and blood and bronze of the Trojan War are abstract. But what happens when these same texts are read by young men and women who do know the weight of putting on armor, who have themselves kissed loved ones goodbye before departing for battle? Who must walk away from their own infant children in order to defend the country? What happens when the students who stand before Homer's text are not just dispassionately analyzing the soul of the warrior but are warriors themselves? Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver speaks in this episode with Ido Hevroni, a professor of literature at Shalem College in Jerusalem. For over a decade, Hevroni has guided Shalem students through Homer's epics, watching them grapple with these eternal questions of personal pride and public duty, private love and public defense, glory and sacrifice. But now, after October 7, his students find themselves in active combat, and he finds that it is Homer who is helping to explain their own experience back to themselves. And it is their experience in the tanks and tunnels of Gaza that is teaching them to read Homer with new eyes. Hevroni recently wrote about teaching the Odyssey in the pages of Mosaic, and that essay was published in honor of Ido's own teacher, Amy Apfel Kass, z"l, whose yortsayt on the fifth of Elul falls on the day that this conversation was originally broadcast. This discussion, too, is dedicated to her memory.  

In "A College Guide for the Perplexed," our feature essay this month at Mosaic, our focus is on higher-education reform, the future and fate of the humanities, and helping parents of Jewish students figure out the best places to pursue university studies. This is not the first time that Mosaic has dealt with these and related issues. In May 2024, my Mosaic colleague Andrew Koss wrote a searching, provocative essay in which he looked specifically at the field of Jewish studies. In the spring of that year, when campuses had exploded in pro-Hamas, anti-Jewish activism, how did professors of Jewish studies react? How should they have reacted? Andrew probes the history and sociology of this academic discipline in his blockbuster essay "Jewish Studies against the Jews." Later that month, we invited one of the eminent figures in the field of Jewish studies, the UCLA historian David N. Myers, to discuss the essay with Andrew. Professor Myers, as Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver notes in his introductory remarks to that conversation, is prominent not only in his scholarship but also in his public commentary—on questions of Israeli public policy and defense policy, and American public policy—that is very different from our general orientation at Mosaic. We were grateful that he joined us, despite those differences, and at the end of their interaction, some of the core tensions and disagreements between Andrew and David come to the surface. Their conversation was broadcast exclusively for Mosaic subscribers. Today we're airing as a podcast this dialogue about whether and why Jewish studies as a field has turned against Jews on campus and beyond.

Between the year 63 before the Common Era, and the year 136 of the Common Era, the Jewish people waged three revolts against the mightiest empire in the world. In retrospect, we can see that these were not only local uprisings, but civilizational confrontations that would echo through history—struggles that pitted the Jewish people's fierce determination to live as a free nation in their ancestral homeland against Rome's inexorable drive to impose order across its vast dominions. What makes these revolts so fascinating is not merely their military drama, but the profound questions they raise about how different civilizations remember and interpret the same events. Recall the way that Rome understood its purpose and its mission, the grand aspirations that fueled Rome's rise and Rome's bloodstained greatness. As Vergil puts it in the Book VI of the Aeneid (in John Dryden's poetic rendering): But, Rome, 't is thine alone, with awful sway, To rule mankind, and make the world obey, Disposing peace and war by thy own majestic way; To tame the proud, the fetter'd slave to free: These are imperial arts, and worthy thee. When Roman historians recorded these conflicts in Judea, they saw rebellious subjects disrupting the peace that Rome had brought to the world. They saw the Jews as ingrates and troublemakers, who refused to appreciate the benefits of imperial rule. But when Jewish historians look back on this period they tend to see something altogether different: a tragic tale of national resistance—a struggle for freedom—to defend the honor of God, His people, and His land. These competing narratives reveal something essential about the nature of historical memory, and the separate moral universes of these rival civilizational traditions. To illuminate and explain this conflict, Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver speaks with Barry Strauss, formerly a longtime professor of classics at Cornell University, and now a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. His forthcoming book is Jews vs. Rome: Two Centuries of Rebellion Against the World's Mightiest Empire, to which he brings deep expertise in Roman military history, and also a keen appreciation for the strategic dimensions of these conflicts.

On July 29, Gallup published a new poll showing American support for Israel's military action in Gaza at a historic low. But a strong majority (71 percent) of Republicans say they approve of Israel's conduct in Gaza, and that is up from 66 percent in September. Of Israel's military action in Iran, 78 percent of Republicans approve. And 67 percent of Republicans have a favorable opinion of Israel's prime minister. Even as the broader American public continues to cool on Israel, Republican support for Israel's conduct of the war isn't just holding steady—it's actually strengthening. Earlier this week, the speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, visited Judea and Samaria, and had dinner with the prime minster in the biblical city of Shiloh. Here's what makes Gallup's findings so remarkable: if you spent any time on right-wing social media over the past months, you'd expect to see Republican support for Israel cratering. But peer beneath the surface of the online discourse, and a more complicated picture emerges. Republican voters not only remain steadfast but are actually becoming more supportive, even as influential voices—influential especially with the young—are striking out in a very different direction. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, once a reliable Trump ally, now calls the Gaza war a genocide. Tucker Carlson's social-media engagement spikes whenever he advances an anti-Israel narrative, hosts an anti-Israel guest, or moots anti-Israel conspiracy theories.  Even some longtime pro-Israel voices from the right have made themselves unwitting tools of Hamas and Iranian propaganda. Our guest this week is the Hudson Institute senior fellow Michael Doran, and our subject is Israel and the American right. Of course, the disjuncture between Republican voters and the most prominent and loudest voices in Republican media is not a new story. When you train your eyes on that fact, the entire Trump era, from his 2016 campaign forward, has seen the emergence of a new media elite whose views simply do not convey the attitudes of their base as well as the president himself does. But of course the Trump era will end in a few years, and the contours and debate within the post-Trump right over attitudes toward Israel is being shaped right now.

This month at Mosaic, we hosted a very important set of conversations, spurred on by a very important essay: "The Enchantment of the Arab Mind," by the Egyptian-American writer Hussein Aboubakr Mansour. Mansour traces the roots of jihadism to European, and especially German, philosophy, transmitted through 20th-century Arab radicalism. Earlier this week, we broadcast a conversation about the essay with Hussein and two eminent professors: Bernard Haykel from Princeton University and Ze'ev Maghen from Bar-Ilan University. The discussion was at times contentious in the best, and most illuminating, of ways. For anyone interested in intellectual history and the history of the Middle East, this is one of the most fascinating conversations we've ever convened. Musical selections in this podcast are drawn from the Quintet for Clarinet and Strings, op. 31a, composed by Paul Ben-Haim and performed by the ARC Ensemble.  

This week, Columbia University reached a $200 million settlement with the Trump administration to resolve multiple federal civil-rights investigations. The deal—which the White House characterized as the largest anti-Semitism-related settlement in U.S. history—will also release hundreds of millions of dollars in suspended federal grants that had been withheld from Columbia as the administration sought to guarantee the rights of Jewish students and faculty at an institution that has become, since October 7, a hotbed of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel activism. Since taking office, the Trump administration has acted aggressively against anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism at America's elite universities—taking aim at some of the most storied names in higher education: Harvard, Penn, Brown, Columbia. And this effort shows no signs of slowing down. What are the legal tools that the executive branch departments and agencies—especially the Departments of Justice and Education—have at their disposal to protect the rights of Jews on campus? Is there a tension between the protection of Jewish civil rights, on the one hand, and the free speech of students and the academic freedom of faculty, on the other? Last December, just before the new administration took office, Mosaic published an important essay by the lawyer Tal Fortgang, asking how the incoming Trump team could vigorously protect Jewish civil rights. Later that month, Tal joined the legal scholar David E. Bernstein of George Mason University for a conversation about his essay, which was originally made exclusively available to Mosaic subscribers. Today, as the Trump administration implements some of the very principles and strategies that Tal raised in the pages of Mosaic, we are pleased to share that discussion with you. You can also read the transcript here. Musical selections in this podcast are drawn from the Quintet for Clarinet and Strings, op. 31a, composed by Paul Ben-Haim and performed by the ARC Ensemble.    

We are now in a period in the liturgical calendar of the Jewish people known as the Three Weeks, which begins on the seventeenth day of the Hebrew month of Tammuz, and continues through the ninth day of the month of Av. It is a period of mourning and commemoration of many experiences of tragedy and sorrow in the Jewish past, and it culminates on the Ninth of Av, or Tisha b'Av, because on that day, in the year 586 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar's forces destroyed the First Temple in Jerusalem. It was also on that day, in the year 70 CE, that Roman forces destroyed the Second Temple in Jerusalem. These events the Jewish people, together, as a nation, remember at this time of year. But how can a person remember an event that he or she never experienced? That is the organizing question that the rabbi and historian Jacob J. Schacter asks in his eight-part video course, "The Jewish Meaning of Memory." That course, like all of Tikvah's video courses, is available free of charge at courses.tikvah.org. This week, to elevate our study during the Three Weeks,  we are broadcasting its first episode.

October 7th exposed to everyone what many in and around the academy have known for years: American universities—not all, but many—are failing catastrophically to educate the next generation about the history, cultures, and politics of the Middle East. Instead of producing students versed in the region's complexities, these institutions have become factories for ideological activism. And nowhere is this truer than in the case of Israel and its history: Zionism in the modern university classroom is rarely examined as a movement of national liberation but instead as a caricature of colonialism, racism, repression, and occupation. And outside of the classroom, we've seen the most prestigious campuses in the United States transform into nodes of anti-Israel activism and Jew hatred. These are immense and long-standing problems. But instead of just diagnosing their sources and discussing their perils, today we're going to talk to someone who's actually done something about it. Robert Satloff saw this crisis clearly. Having published back in 2001 the eminent historian Martin Kramer's short volume on the corruption of Middle East Studies, Ivory Towers on Sand, Satloff has spent decades watching the field drift toward anti-Israel political advocacy. As the executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, he decided to stop complaining and found his own professional master's program. Working with Pepperdine University, the Washington Institute has established a completely new graduate program designed to train policy professionals with rigorous scholarship and historical accuracy, without anti-Israel bias. The program offers full scholarships, accepts no foreign funding, is fully accredited, and will convene its inaugural cohort in Washington, DC this fall.

This week, America celebrates 249 years of independence. As the countdown begins to our 250th birthday, our semiquincentennial, it is natural to ask what citizenship means to us as Americans, and as American Jews. How do we fulfill our obligations not just to preserve what we've inherited, but to renew it for future generations? These aren't just political questions—they're moral ones, rooted in how we understand our responsibilities to one another and to the institutions that shape our common life.  To address those questions, this week's podcast is going to do something a little different. Rather than host a conversation, we bring you a speech by one of the great teachers of American civics: Yuval Levin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the editor of National Affairs. Speaking at the 2024 Jewish Leadership Conference, Levin offered a meditation on what we can learn from the biblical figure of Nehemiah—drawing on the story the rebuilding of Jerusalem's walls to understand how we must approach the renewal of American culture today. His central insight is striking: just as Nehemiah's workers rebuilt Jerusalem with "a trowel in one hand and a sword in the other," we too must simultaneously rebuild and defend our institutions. This is a speech that bridges ancient biblical wisdom to the challenges of American society, showing how the Hebrew Bible speaks directly to our moment of cultural dissolution and the opportunity for renewal. If you're inspired by this kind of discussion—the intersection of Jewish ideas and public life—you might want to consider attending this year's Jewish Leadership Conference, featuring Herzl Prize laureates Ben Shapiro, Bari Weiss, and Dan Senor. You can find information about the 2025 conference at www.jewishleadershipconference.org.

On June 22, American B-2 bombers dropped hundreds of tons of explosives on three nuclear sites in Iran—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Right after President Trump announced that the pilots were out of Iranian air space, the world started to learn the details of Operation Midnight Hammer, the extraordinary American mission to neutralize Iran's nuclear-weapons program. News coverage started immediately—and some of the most incisive and careful analysis appeared outside of the legacy media. Some of the best news coverage in English could be found at the Free Press, the Daily Wire, and the Call Me Back podcast.   Rather than bring on the guests who've already offered up their analysis in those venues, we thought it would be valuable to have a series of conversations on dimensions of this war—not only Operation Midnight Hammer, but the last two weeks beginning with the Israeli airstrikes on Iran—that take up some of the deeper, less immediate concerns. War is violent and bloody. But war is also a teacher, and it reveals things about the nations who wage it.   "Living Through History: Learning from the Twelve-Day War" is a series of conversations from the Tikvah Podcast at Mosaic and featuring its host, Jonathan Silver. These include a discussion with Rabbi Meir Soloveichik on what the war reveals about providence and Jewish history; with Hussein Aboubakr Mansour about what the war reveals about the clash of civilizations; with the Israeli ambassador to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, about what the war reveals about the U.S.- Israel relationship at this moment in Zionist history; and with Victor Davis Hanson about what the war reveals about the American interest. Today you can listen to the first, with Rabbi Soloveichik.  

On June 24, members of New York City's Democratic party will select their nominee for the mayoral election that is scheduled to take place in November of this year. As of last year, 56 percent of registered voters in New York were Democrats, but even that number doesn't fully express the extent of the Democratic party's hold over the city's affairs. Democrats hold a supermajority on the city council and control the three major citywide offices—mayor, comptroller, and public advocate—and all three of New York City's congressional representatives are Democrats. New York is a Democratic city, and it is widely believed that the winner of the Democratic primary will be heavily favored in the fall vote. Even though the official election isn't until November, the most important element in that election will be determined next week. Because New York remains the most important Jewish city in the United States, next week's primary election will have outsized consequences for more Jews than any other municipal election. To discuss the candidates and to explore the Jewish questions that are going to be put before the next mayor, Jonathan Silver is joined by Jay Lefkowitz, a senior partner at Kirkland and Ellis, an adjunct professor at Columbia Law School, and a member of Tikvah's board of trustees. Lefkowitz also served the George W. Bush administration as the United States envoy on human rights in North Korea and the deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy.The conversation touches on anti-Israel and anti-Jewish violence, domestic terror, and education and funding in haredi schools—all of which are election issues in way or another—and on what matters most to Jewish voters. The conversation touches on anti-Israel and anti-Jewish violence, domestic terror, and education and funding in haredi schools—all of which are election issues in way or another—and on what matters most to Jewish voters.

On April 22, 2025, Islamist terrorists struck Indian civilians in Kashmir. Twenty-six people were killed, most of them Hindu tourists. This attack would trigger what analysts now call the "88-Hour War"—a brief but intense conflict between India and Pakistan that ended only after American diplomatic intervention. This four-day war revealed a shift in the strategic landscape that only decades ago would have been unthinkable. When Indian forces engaged Pakistani positions, they deployed Israeli-made drones. When diplomatic support mattered, Israel stood unambiguously with India. Meanwhile, Pakistan relied heavily on Chinese weapons and Turkish diplomatic backing. The conflicts of the Middle East were being played out on the Indian subcontinent.   On this week's podcast, Jonathan Silver is joined by Sadanand Dhume, a senior fellow of the American Enterprise Institute and the author of a June 4 article in the Wall Street Journal titled "Mideast Power Plays in India and Pakistan." In it, Dhume explains that India—once among Israel's harshest critics and a reflexive supporter of the Palestinian cause—has become Israel's largest arms customer, accounting for 34 percent of Israeli weapons exports. That story about arms exports then opens up onto a larger story about how two democracies, each seeing themselves as ancient civilizations facing modern terrorist threats, have found common cause. Silver and Dhume discuss the transformation of Israel-India relations from cold-war hostility to strategic partnership, by focusing on the arms trade between them.

On April 13, 2025, an arsonist set fire to the residence of the governor of Pennsylvania. When apprehended, he told law-enforcement officers that he did so using Molotov cocktails. The attack took place just hours after the governor, an American Jew, and his Jewish family, had concluded their Passover seder. The next month, a far-left activist murdered two members of the Israeli embassy staff in the name of Palestine, having gone to a Jewish venue hosting a Jewish event in order to hunt down and kill Jewish people. Not long after, on May 28, a Michigan man was apprehended outside of a Jewish preschool, after threatening Jewish parents and children. It was later discovered that he had attempted to acquire firearms and had planned to kill members of the school. Then there was the most recent news. On June 1, an Egyptian national came to a solidarity walk for Israeli hostages in Boulder, Colorado. There, he threw Molotov cocktails and used a homemade flamethrower in order to burn the attendees. While hurling the explosives, he was recorded yelling "Free Palestine," and other like phrases. A new season of violence has descended upon the Jews of America. Or, perhaps, one ought to say that a new season of violence has descended upon America with the Jews as its central of target, revealing for all to see the dangers of domestic terrorism. The historian and analyst of anti-Semitism Jeffrey Herf, professor emeritus at the University of Maryland, joins Jonathan Silver to discuss this spike in domestic terrorism. It is his contention that the phenomenon has an antecedent in the 1960s radical movements that, then as now, transformed leftist ideas into violent action. The slogan "globalize the intifada," has been a hallmark of campus and leftist protest since October 7, but it has slipped the bounds of speech and resulted in violence, with deadly results. Drawing on the work of the writer Paul Berman, Herf goes on to argue that if history is any guide, violence against Jews is likely to increase. He laid this out in an article he published in the Free Press just hours after the Boulder attack.