I am an ordained American Jewish cantor who loves the people and land of Israel and who is fully cognizant of the existential threat that the Iranian regime presents for the world. Still, I unequivocally oppose Israel’s June 12-13, 2025, pre-emptive attack on Iran in its “Operation Rising Lion” and the June 21 American airstrikes to follow on its nuclear facilities, dubbed “Operation Midnight Hammer.”
I have a responsibility to myself, my children, and future generations to explain where I stand at this fraught, tenuous moment, as the world seems to stare into the abyss of this unfolding catastrophe. Specifically, the truth that I feel compelled to articulate clearly is that two wrongs never make a right. I have come to understandthe lethal implications of this lesson in my work as an activist striving to end the vengeful practice of capital punishment. Just as this truth applies to Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Gaza in response to the horrific Hamas terrorist attack of October 7, 2023, so does it with Israel’s recent military offensive against Iran. Even if the current conflict leads to a necessary regime change in Iran, and even if it does not snowball into a broader regional conflict, it is abundantly clear that the ends of this offensive do not justify the means. There are indeed occasions that justify war. (I myself would have enlisted to fight back against Hitler, Napoleon and other aggressors.) A conflict with a Iran in this case, despite the threat that regime poses to its citizens of the world, does not qualify.
The risk of global conflagration increased exponentially when the United States subsequently joined in Israel’s attack. American entry in this war marks the latest chapter in what acclaimed historian Barbara Tuchman dubbed “The March of Folly” – the repeated historical pattern of amassing more wrongs in the purported attempt to make things right. History may assert that I am in error, but the victors often write history.
The prospect of eliminating the Iranian government’s decades-long threat to Israel and the United States does not permit those nations to abrogate international humanitarian law, especially the human right to life. Make no mistake: Israel’s recent aggression, leading to hundreds of civilian deaths, was in clear violation of such law. It was a politically-motivated strike that legitimized war-mongering under the grossly misapplied flag of “self-defense.” Whether or not it was strategically advantageous to strike Iran when it was weak and isolated to achieve military aims is moot; the moral argument must always outweigh the strategic one.
As a dedicated death penalty abolitionist, I am keenly aware of the mortal danger that Iranian mullahs have also posed for their own citizens through the use of politically-motivated capital punishment, including brutal public hangings, and other barbaric “criminal justice” practices. Examples include the state killings of Iranian Jews like Nethanel Ben Ziona Ghahremani, Z’L, (of blessed memory), whom Iran put to death for a clear act of self-defense, and of non-Jews like Mahsa Amini, Z’L, whose unjustifiable murder at the hands of Iranian authorities sparked the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement. (Notably, Israel’s recent attack has only further endangered the lives of condemned Iranians facing execution.) I have many Iranian friends and colleagues who have been applauding Israeli and American efforts to “liberate” their homeland. If I were living in Israel or if the Iranian government had targeted me or victimized my family members, I, too, might very well be in support of the recent attacks on Iran. I therefore do not judge those who applaud the current campaign. Reasonable minds certainly can disagree on this issue.
Advocates for the military strikes have spoken about their possible benefits. These include the potential ousting of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his extremist followers. The people of Iran might, as they predict, be able to seize upon this moment to create a new government that helps herald in a golden age for Iran. Their success could spark a new “lasting” peace in the Middle East. Even if all of this were to come to pass, Israel – and now the United States – still would have been in the wrong in this illegal assault.
Ethics, morals, and human rights – these all matter. They are not simply words on a page or ideas to ponder or heed when convenient. They should serve as underpinnings to the rule of law. Society ignores that law and these foundational values at its peril. Doing so leaves a Pandora’s Box open for others to manipulate for their nefarious ends. I have a responsibility as a proud Jew to do my part to uphold the line of ethics and human rightsthat I believe my spiritual tradition has been striving to carve out since its founding. To remain silent or toe the party line in the face of the erosion of this fundamental moral line is to be complicit in its destruction. To do so when that disintegration directly results in hundreds of civilian deaths in Iran, and indirectly in Israel from reciprocal missile attacks, strains credulity. While there can be some room for flexibility, even bending the “rules of war” when adhering to such ideals in the service of ultimate peace and balance, cutting corners when human lives are at stake is not viable, by definition.
The world must continue to seek to remove the threat of the current Iranian clerical regime legally and justly through ongoing negotiation. The belligerent approach of Israel and the United States constitutes a moral failure and an indefensible decision that establishes the wrong precedent for human civilization. Holocaust survivor, Zionist, and dedicated death penalty abolitionist Elie Wiesel famously said of capital punishment: “death is not the answer.” Israeli and American political leaders should heed his prophetic words.
May all innocent lives in the lines of fire in Israel and Iran be safe during this blatantly unjust war, and may there be peace soon in our day.
This first appeared in the Times of Israel.
