viewpoints »
Nuclear Deal continued from page 6
routes for Iran, for an extended period
of time, was the goal of the Iran-U.S.
Treaty concluded a year ago. All present
indications are that the goal has been
achieved.
There are two proven routes to nuclear
explosives: U-235 and plutonium. U-235
is an isotope of uranium whose nucleus
contains 92 protons (characteristic of all
uranium) and 147 neutrons. It is fissile,
meaning that it can absorb additional
neutrons, split into two smaller nuclei,
releasing a great deal of energy and sev-
eral more neutrons which can initiate
the fission process in neighboring U-235
nuclei.
The resulting “fast-chain reaction” is
the sought-for nuclear explosion. But
U-235 is extremely rare! The usual ura-
nium, as mined in many places on Earth,
consists of just 0.07 percent U-235; most
of the rest is U-238 (3 more neutrons
exist in the nucleus). To create a func-
tional explosive, it must be enriched to
about 90 percent U-235, a very difficult
process, since all uranium isotopes are
chemically identical.
The U.S. has used four different
methods: gas diffusion, electromagnetic,
laser separation and centrifugal. The
last is the most efficient and has been
generally adapted, but it requires banks
of thousands of centrifuges spinning
at fantastic rates. It is the method that
Iran has successfully adopted after many
delays and setbacks, some caused by
external hacking (U.S.? Israel?).
According to the treaty and verified
by inspection from the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA, a U.N.
agency based in Vienna), Iran has made
its banks of centrifuges — as developed
and made operative over many years —
inoperative and shipped its stock of pre-
viously created U-235 to Russia. Hence
the U-235 route to a nuclear explosive is
barred to Iran for at least 10 years.
The alternate route is plutonium,
which does not occur naturally on
Earth. It is produced in nuclear reactors
(the same reactors that supply electric
power in many countries) when the
predominant naturally occurring isotope
of uranium, U-238, absorbs a “slow”
neutron. Iran was constructing the nec-
essary reactor, but the treaty required
the construction to cease and the core to
be filled with concrete, putting it out of
business permanently. This destruction
of the reactor has also been verified by
the IAEA inspectors.
Thus, both feasible routes to an
Iranian nuclear weapon have been
blocked for as long as the treaty holds.
If Iran were to repudiate the treaty and
kick out the inspectors, it would take
several years for it to regain the nuclear
status it had before the treaty was signed.
It is impossible in an ever-changing
dangerous world to guarantee national
prosperity and absolute security into the
distant future. However, given a con-
tinued verified treaty-compliant Iran,
concerns about nuclear threats from
that quarter are unwarranted in the near
term.
*
Alvin M. Saperstein is a professor emeritus of
physics (Wayne State University), fellow of the
American Physical Society and the American
Association of the Advancement of Science, former
editor of the Journal of Physics and Society, and
winner of many national and international research
and teaching fellowships.
Trouble In The Tribe continued from page 6
Israeli governments” and urged Jews
“to accept that in both America and
Israel, we live in an age not of Jewish
weakness, but of Jewish power, and that
without moral vigilance, Jews will abuse
power just as hideously as anyone else.”
Waxman suggests that the arguments
surrounding Israel are also indicative of
the growing polarization of American
Jewry between Orthodox and non-
Orthodox Jews over issues such as the
nature of the Jewish state, final status
of the settlements in the West Bank and
Israel’s borders.
According to recent surveys, the
younger generation does have an
emotional attachment to Israel though
it is often at odds with the political
actions of the Israeli government. A
critical but activist relationship to
Israel, Waxman suggests, can help
8 September 1 • 2016
bring about changes in Israeli policy
if American Jewish leaders and Israeli
policy makers will listen rather than
reject. If that happens, he says, “the
American Jewish conflict over Israel,
though divisive and often acrimonious,
may turn out to have been productive.”
Trouble in the Tribe is a meticulous,
precise, well-organized survey of diver-
gent views within the American Jewish
community today. It can serve as a
much-needed resource to facilitate civil
and constructive conversations about
a topic that sadly has become taboo
within the Jewish community.
*
Rabbi Robert Orkand, who retired from the pulpit
rabbinate in 2013, lives in the Boston area. He is
immediate past-chair of ARZA, the Associati on of
Reform Zionists of America. This essay was originally
posted on ReformJudaism.org.
editorial
Federation: Choose Transparency
T
he special relationship between the
Jewish Federation of Metropolitan
Detroit and the community it
serves is built upon shared responsibilities,
expectations and trust.
For generations, Federation earned
its position as the community’s central
address for planning and resource develop-
ment. Its leaders understood that to have a
cohesive community — and one that could
generate needed charitable dollars from
thousands of donors, large and small — it
was required to view them as partners.
Partners, in turn, expected education,
information and transparency about the
community’s ongoing and changing needs
so they could maintain confidence and
trust in the centralized annual fundrais-
ing and allocation process known as the
Annual Campaign.
However, a trend toward secrecy at
Federation is emerging that, if left unad-
dressed, will lead to an erosion of trust and
undermine the Annual Campaign.
There are many recent examples, includ-
ing the virtual disappearance of a once-
widely shared Federation community
annual report. Two stories from today’s edi-
tion of the Jewish News illustrate the point
and identify a path for transparency and
renewed trust. Both involve the Federation
and the Jewish Community Center (JCC).
To reduce the JCC’s chronic financial
deficits, it was announced in late 2014
that the Jimmy Prentis Morris facility in
Oak Park would close. The plan was made
public after the decision was made. Two
forums in January 2015 attracted 750 peo-
ple who voiced outrage at failure to involve
the community as part of the process —
and the lack of transparency. Subsequently,
a grass roots “Save the Oak Park JCC”
group formed and interfaced regularly
with Federation leaders. In August 2015,
an anonymous donor pledged to replace
the building with an updated facility that
would still serve the community’s needs.
The JPM facility closed its doors on Aug.
31, 2015.
And then, silence. For weeks. For
months. For almost a full year. Ron
Aronson, a leader of the Save the Oak
Park JCC group, said in a story on page 10:
“There were no announcements or visible
activity at the building, not even a sign
saying ‘watch this space.’ The community
was completely in the dark about what was
happening, if anything. We understand
that rebuilding or renovation is a compli-
cated and sometimes lengthy process, but
there is simply no excuse for Federation
failing to keep the community informed.”
According to Federation, the reason for
the silence was “there was nothing con-
crete to report” because a viable model for
assuring a new facility that would meet the
needs of the community and the anony-
mous donor was incomplete. The absence
of a viable model, and attempts to develop
one, was important to communicate.
Juxtapose the shroud of secrecy envelop-
ing Federation’s Oak Park JCC decision-
making with the separate story on page
14 about the JCC’s continuing financial
challenges. In it, new JCC CEO Brian Siegel
offers transparent responses as part of a
recipe for regaining trust. “The commu-
nity lost confidence that we were telling a
straight story, and the JCC bears responsi-
bility for that,” said Siegel, who had been
JCC president during a portion of its finan-
cial turmoil.
Federation would be wise to follow the
path of Mr. Siegel. He recognizes that open,
honest and regular communication (some-
thing especially important to the new gen-
eration of donors the Federation seeks to
cultivate) earns trust — the underpinning
of the relationship between the community,
Federation and its Annual Campaign.
*
See related stories on pages 10 and 14.