(June 30, 2025 / JNS) When Israel launched a precision strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities on June 13, nearly every segment of the U.S. Jewish community rallied behind it. Zev Stub of The Times of Israel wrote, “Jewish organizations from across the spectrum came out in strong support of Israel following the launch of its preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities … .”

But there was one conspicuous exception: J Street.

Its statement on June 13 urged “a reassessment” and called for renewed diplomacy, while cautioning that the strike “could give Iran … incentive … to pursue a nuclear weapon.” There was no clear support for Israel’s right to defend itself, no recognition of the existential threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program. In the face of a moment that demanded moral clarity, it wavered. Nowhere in its statement did it explicitly say that Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons.

That stands in stark contrast to Israel’s political leadership from all corners of its ideological spectrum.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett made his position clear on June 12 when he wrote on X: “Israel’s strike against Iran’s nuclear program and military was vital, and done at the very last moment possible. All Israelis—left and right—support this action of self-defense. Iran was about to get 10 nuclear warheads.”

Yair Lapid, also a former Israeli prime minister and currently the leader of the left-of-center Yesh Atid Party, posted on June 15 in The Jerusalem Post: “Netanyahu is my political rival, but his decision to strike Iran at this moment in time is the right one. The whole country is united in this moment. When faced with an enemy sworn to our destruction, nothing will divide us.”

Israeli President Isaac Herzog, former leader of the opposition until 2018, told NPR on June 18: “We have to stop this empire of evil—no more!—and tell them, get the goddamn nukes out of your hands. And start behaving in a decent way and not be the rogue state you are all over the world. It’s impossible.”

Each of the above leaders, who are frequent critics of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, acknowledged that the time for action had arrived. They stood with the Netanyahu-led government in support of the strike. This was not a Netanyahu decision; it was an Israeli decision. And that unity sends a powerful message: The threat from Iran transcends partisan politics.

Yechiel Leiter, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, appearing on Fox News Sunday on June 15, put it plainly: What Israel is doing “is preventing war, not advancing war.” That message resonates with Israelis, who understand the stakes far better than many in Washington.

J Street’s refusal to back Israel’s operation, even tepidly, reveals a deeper truth: The organization has moved further and further from the Jewish mainstream. While the Democratic Majority for Israel, a group that often aligns with progressive U.S. politicians, posted a clear message of support—“We stand with Israel as it takes necessary steps to defend itself from existential threats”—J Street issued a diplomatic non-statement, expressing concern for “all those in harm’s way” and warning about escalation.

Founded in 2007, J Street billed itself as “pro-Israel, pro-peace.” But the group’s overwhelming focus on Palestinian statehood, its repeated criticism of Israeli self-defense actions, and now its opposition to the elimination of a nuclear threat raise real questions about its priorities. When diplomacy fails and Israel is left to act alone, being “pro-peace” becomes meaningless if it also means being unwilling to defend Israel when it’s under attack.

The operation against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure wasn’t reckless; it was necessary. Iran’s regime has made no secret of its genocidal intentions toward Israel. Tehran has used Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and other terrorist proxies to encircle Israel militarily while pushing its nuclear program toward breakout capacity. Jerusalem’s preemptive action was a defensive measure against a regime actively pursuing a future in which Israel no longer exists.

Bennett and Lapid recognized the urgency. J Street did not.

This isn’t a minor policy disagreement. It’s a fundamental divergence on how to ensure the safety and survival of the Jewish state. When American Jewish organizations weigh in on matters of life and death for Israelis, there is an obligation to speak with moral clarity. Most did. J Street did not.

And that’s the real takeaway here. This moment revealed something essential about J Street’s role in Jewish communal life. It is not the dissenting voice within the pro-Israel camp that it desperately wants to be seen as. J Street is increasingly an outsider, estranged from the Jewish community’s core values and consensus. Let us not forget this. 

-------------------------
Moshe Phillips is national chairman of Americans For A Safe Israel (www.AFSI.org), a leading pro-Israel advocacy and education organization.