Temple Israel Valparaiso Rabbi Shoshana Feferman woke up early Saturday and saw most of the breaking news alerts about the U.S. and Israel bombing Iran. Feferman said she wasn’t surprised by what she was reading and seeing.
Iran has been sponsoring terrorist organizations like Hezbollah, Hamas and others and developing nuclear weapons, Rabbi Feferman said.
“They were treating the people of Iran in a terrible, terrible way. Justice is prevailing right now,” Rabbi Feferman said.
On Saturday, President Donald Trump launched “a surprise attack against Iran,” according to the Associated Press. The attack, which was launched in partnership with Israeli leadership, killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and dozens of other senior figures.
With Khamenei’s death, Trump urges Iranians to overthrow the country’s theocracy, according to the Associated Press. The attack came two days after the latest U.S.-Iran talks aimed at placing controls on Tehran’s — the country’s capital — nuclear program.
Bob Feferman, the rabbi’s husband, said her family lives in Israel and they’ve been talking to her family a lot since the attacks began. Feferman’s family has been spending a lot of time in bomb shelters, he said.
“They understand that this is the war for the survival of Israel because the intentions of the Iranian regime are very clear. They talk about their goal of the destruction of Israel all the time,” Bob Feferman said. “It’s difficult, but they’re united in their understanding of the necessity of the war.”
The U.S. and Israel displayed a “strategic partnership” in attacking Iran together, Bob Feferman said, because Israel has intelligence capabilities that the U.S. depends on, and the joint planning and coordination helped the mission.
With the two countries attacking Iran, they are working “to remove a threat to the Middle East and the entire war,” Bob Feferman said.
The Iranian regime started the war about 47 years ago, Bob Feferman said, when, during the Islamic Revolution, the Iranian regime ordered the takeover of a U.S. Embassy and held diplomats hostage for a year and a half.
“That started the whole war. America didn’t want it. Israel didn’t want it. But they’ve been at war with us. This operation, hopefully, could put an end to that war,” Bob Feferman said.
While President Donald Trump campaigned against “endless” wars, Bob Feferman said it’s likely the president “is trying to prevent a much bigger threat,” which would’ve been a nuclear-armed Iran.
“He tried to negotiate in good faith to get them to put an end to their nuclear weapons program, and they were not willing to negotiate in good faith,” Bob Feferman said. “It’s been very clear that he understands that (Iran) cannot have nuclear weapons.”
Bob Feferman said he hopes the war is over soon. If a regime change isn’t possible, then he hopes for “a change in regime behavior,” which would include no more support for terrorism, no more efforts to build ballistic missiles, and an end to the pursuit of nuclear weapons, he said.
“Hopefully, it will be over soon. Nobody wants a forever war,” Bob Feferman said.
The U.S. and Iran have a complicated history, said Gregg Johnson, dean of Valparaiso University’s College of Arts and Sciences.
In the 1950’s, Iran had a democratically elected government that sought to nationalize its oil so it would be the country’s resource rather than one for BP. The U.S. and Great Britain helped overthrow the government in 1953, Johnson said, and install the Shah, who ruled Iran as a dictator until 1979.
“He was pretty authoritarian but pro-Western authoritarian,” Johnson said. “During the Cold War, there were all sorts of human rights violations, and there were mass protests in the ’70s, some of which were led by the religious community and religious leaders. … Then you have the Iranian Revolution, and the group that is most organized that comes to power is a religious community and a fundamentalist, Shia Muslim government.”
Iran had an elected side of its government, Johnson said, but it was overruled by the religious community to create a theocracy.
During the first Trump administration, Johnson said the president campaigned explicitly against the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, which limited the country’s nuclear program and was created during former President Barack Obama’s administration.
“Not that there were great relations between the United States and Iran during the Obama administration, but during the first Trump administration, obviously, relations deteriorated,” Johnson said.
During former President Joe Biden’s administration, conversations were had about restarting the nuclear deal, but “they didn’t really get far,” Johnson said. Then, Trump came back into power, and the administration is “quite adamantly” opposed to the Iranian government.
Trump has been close with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Johnson said, which is also part of why the U.S. was supportive of the attack on Iran.
Paul Olander, lecturer of political science and international relations at Valparaiso University, said that after the previous U.S. attack on Iran about a year ago, officials claimed to have set Iran’s nuclear capabilities back about two years.
“Now it seems that despite that, the Iranian regime was going to continue to press forward with whatever it is that they were doing, like maintaining their current stockpiles of enriched uranium to develop their capabilities,” Olander said. “It seems that the strikes that just happened are some sort of bargaining tactic, and that Trump and his administration are not satisfied with the concessions they’ve received from the Iranian government.”
Olander believes that the Trump administration was either trying to kill Iran’s former leader and reinstate a new one or destabilize the country to claim to have neutralized its nuclear capabilities.
Marie Eisenstein, associate professor of political science at Indiana University Northwest, said the U.S. has been formally at odds with Iran since the 1979 revolution.
“Iran has consistently, across many governments, been ranked as one of — if not the — largest state sponsors of terror,” Eisenstein said. “Yes, it’s complicated for us in the U.S., but Iran has been a major destabilizing influence throughout its own region, and that has ripple effects for other countries.”
Since its 1979 revolution, Eisenstein said Iranian leadership has had two major chants, “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” Eisenstein said Iranian leadership refers to the U.S. as “the great Satan” and Israel as “the little Satan.”
Eisenstein believes that U.S. diplomatic support for Israel has clumped the two countries together for Iran.
“Iran has made it very, very clear that they want to exterminate Israel and essentially wipe its mainly Jewish inhabitants off the planet,” Eisenstein said. “Israel has learned throughout its history, and the Jewish people have learned throughout their history, that you take these threats seriously.”
Eisenstein believes that the response from other Middle Eastern countries will be positive because they’re already against Iran for “indiscriminately shooting missiles into their sovereign territory.” Outside the Middle East, Eisenstein believes the response won’t be as positive, particularly with Russia and China, who both rely on Iran, Russia for drones and China for crude oil.
As a result, Russia’s ability to fight Ukraine could be affected, Eisenstein said.
Other Middle Eastern countries resent that Israel seems to get away with strikes wherever they want, Olander said, including in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Iraq.
“I think the other Middle Eastern countries are going to put heavy pressure on the United States for this to go away,” he said. “They want this to end quickly because they can’t be seen, even amongst their own people, sticking up for the Israelis.”
Because of the attack, Olander said the price of oil will increase. On Wednesday, the average price of regular gas in Indiana was $3.14, according to AAA, compared to one week ago when it was $2.82.
Olander also expects to see sporadic attacks in the Middle East, especially in the Gulf states. He also said it seems that the U.S. will continue to bomb Iran to see what can come from those attacks.
“The rest of the Middle East has noted that the United States cares about humanitarian stuff so long as their enemies are doing it and not their friends,” Olander said. “If they’re happy with walking away having blown up most of Iran’s military and a lot of their leadership, that might be it. But if they’re not happy, if a large humanitarian crisis breaks out in Iran because the government collapsed, or we can’t be sure of their nuclear material, or if we do have to put boots on the ground … I’m assuming there will be a pretty large negative response in the United States for being drawn into another war.”
Indiana’s legislators responded to the attack in statements this week. U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan, D-Highland, said in a statement, “there is no doubt” that Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons threatens the Middle East, the U.S. and its allies. But the constitution gives Congress “the sole responsibility” to declare war, he said.
“History has taught us that open-ended military engagement in this region carries profound consequences for our troops, their families and our national security,” Mrvan said. “Therefore, I call on Speaker Johnson to reconvene the House so we can receive a full briefing from the administration and hold an immediate vote on a War Powers Resolution.”
Mrvan said Congress should be “steadfast in our support” of the U.S. military members, especially amid the Trump Administration’s “unilateral action” in Iran.
U.S. Sen. Jim Banks, R-Indiana, responded to the attack on Iran in a statement, saying the Iranian regime has killed more than 1,000 U.S. service members and civilians. Banks’ statement was also posted on X Saturday morning.
Banks is a veteran who served in the war in Afghanistan, and he said the effort prevents another war like that.
“President Trump’s actions (Saturday) morning were not about starting a war. They were about preventing one,” Banks said in his statement. “It was targeted, surgical, and strong. It made clear that if you attack or threaten Americans, there will be consequences. … At the end of the day, this is about protecting American lives. I’m grateful we have a leader like President Trump who is willing to do it.”
U.S. Sen. Todd Young, R-Indiana, also responded to the attack in a statement, which was released before a potential vote on a war powers resolution, which gives lawmakers an opportunity to demand congressional approval before any further attacks are carried out, according to the Associated Press.
“The President intends for this to be a short operation, but as the conflict develops, I urge Congress to engage in oversight and policymaking, including evaluating any potential requests for additional resources or providing additional authorities,” Young said in his statement. “I pray for the safety of our troops, our allies, and the Iranian people, and for victory to end five decades of terror by the Islamic Republic.”
In his statement, Young said that Iran has funded terror globally for decades, and the country’s regime has refused to dismantle its nuclear program despite U.S. efforts at diplomacy. Iran’s missiles “are a major threat to regional and global stability,” Young said.
Young believes that Trump’s military options shouldn’t be limited, and that danger will only grow if they are, he said.
“At the same time, the American people have questions pertaining to the nature of threats and the risks to our troops and homeland. Congress must take a more active role in ensuring answers to those questions are clear and timely,” Young said.
“Hearings and public discussion help keep our constituents informed, and they help administrations sharpen their strategies in response to congressional feedback. Too often in recent years, Congress has fallen short of our responsibility to educate, inform, and clarify through vigorous oversight regardless of political party.”
mwilkins@chicagotribune.com; akukulka@post-trib.com
