I was wondering what, exactly, had happened this week such that a) Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman backed away from a Palestinian state; b) President Joe Biden backed away from a Palestinian state; c) Biden dropped criticism of Israel's judicial reforms, at least in public.
The answer dropped late on Wednesday.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the U.S. (with Israeli assent) will assist Saudi Arabia in enriching uranium on Saudi soil. This is another anonymously sourced report, but I believe it because the Biden administration's promises to adhere to "non-proliferation" while doing the opposite sound authentically lame to me, and there is little else that could explain the sudden change in Saudi tone.
So the peace deal would mean that the Saudis get nukes (quietly), Israel gets peace with Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Sunni world, and the Palestinians get concessions that fall short of statehood.
As to the problem of a nuclear Saudi regime: we'll worry later?
It might, after all, be worth the risk, for a variety of reasons.
This week’s portion launches the great story of Abraham, who is told to leave everything of his life behind — except his immediate family — and to leave for “the Land that I shall show you.”
There’s something interesting in the fact that Abraham is told to leave his father’s house, as if breaking away from his father’s life — but his father, in fact, began the journey, moving from Ur to Haran (in last week’s portion). His father set a positive example — why should Abraham leave him?
Some obvious answers suggest themselves — adulthood, needing to make one’s own choices, his father not going far enough, etc.
But I think there is another answer. Abraham (known for the moment as Abram) needs to establish his own household. This is not just about making one’s own choice, but really about choosing one’s own starting point. It’s starting over.
Sometimes we start over in fundamental ways even if much that surrounds us remains the same. Sometimes the journey we have to ...
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
