The timing of the synagogue reading of Parashat Zachor, the command to remember what Amalek did to us, could not have felt more immediate or more relevant. As I read the words recalling an ancient enemy who attacked the Jewish people without cause, the State of Israel had just declared a state of emergency. Within hours, news broke that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whom many view as embodying the spirit of Amalek in our generation, was dead, assassinated in his bunker.

South African-Israeli writer and researcher Samuel J. Hyde observed:

“Khamenei cast himself as the custodian of a revolution waged in God’s name against his enemies, yet he fell to the Jewish State on the eve of a Jewish festival commemorating the defeat of a Persian tyrant who once sought the Jews’ annihilation. The rhythm of history need not be lost.”

The term “Amalek” is often misunderstood, and frequently weaponized. A clip of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quoting the biblical injunction to “remember what Amalek has done to you” has been cited as proof of genocidal intent. The South African delegation even referenced it in proceedings before the ICC. Such claims reveal not insight into Judaism, but a fundamental misunderstanding of Jewish theology and law.

Maimonides (Rambam), the towering medieval Jewish legal authority whose rulings remain central to Halacha, makes clear that the literal nation of Amalek cannot be identified today. Its lineage was lost in antiquity. The commandment, therefore, is not about physically locating and eliminating a biological people. It is rather about remembering, and combating, the moral archetype Amalek represents.

The Torah distinguishes sharply between the nations of Egypt and Amalek. Concerning the Egyptians, despite centuries of slavery, we are instructed not to abhor the Egyptian, “for you were strangers in his land.” (Deuteronomy 23:7).  Egypt’s oppression, though cruel, was politically motivated. Pharaoh feared a growing minority within his borders. Ultimately, Egypt relented and let the Israelites leave, before changing his mind, leading to his army’s destruction at the Sea of Reeds.

Amalek was different. After the Israelites had miraculously crossed the Sea of Reeds, Amalek attacked them from behind, targeting the weak and vulnerable. This was not strategic warfare born of misguided policies and politics. It was hatred for hatred’s sake – an irrational assault on a people newly freed. Amalek thus becomes the Torah’s symbol of ideological evil: violence driven not by interest, but by annihilatory obsession.

Amalekite Hatred and October 07

This week marks two and a half years since October 7, a conflict started by annihilatory obsession by Gaza’s Hamas rulers. Israel had withdrawn in 2005, giving Hamas suitcases of Qatari cash to establish a statelet that would leave Israel alone. However, deep in their heart, the “liberation” of Gaza would not suffice for Hamas, who, as mentioned in Eli Sharabi’s book “Hostage”, demanded every Jew leave the land of Israel to historical residences that were never Jewish and were temporary stays in our long exile. Hamas did not want a Palestine living alongside Israel, or even with a Jewish minority (Jews have always lived in the region). They wanted the complete removal of anything Jewish in the land for the establishment of an Islamic state. The irrational fixation on hating Jews, a form of Amalekism, despite a lack of Jewish presence in Gaza triggered the October 07 attacks and made them ideological allies of the ultimate Amalekism held by Iran. For Iran, fighting Israel was a religious duty to bring about the hidden mufti, their version of the messiah. They hated Israel despite no history of Jewish or Israeli antagonism toward Iran or Persians.

Hatred for hatred’s sake took over our enemies for decades, with October 07 lighting the match that set the region aflame.

Since that fateful day, we have grown accustomed, save for brief lulls, to air-raid sirens, emergency decrees, and military mobilization. At the same time, in parts of the Western world that served as a haven for Jews for a century, a different irrational hatred has emerged. Mass protests by various groups of society not merely criticism of Israeli policy, but calls for Israel’s eradication. Antisemitism has been increasingly raging to record levels in Jewish havens across the West, with many being blinded by media and storylines that take half truths, remove context, and take it to an extreme to incite against the Jews and Israel. For the few Jews and Israelis that have made negative judgement calls, the detractors cherrypick their example to use against the whole nation. Chants of “From the River to the Sea” ring out, accompanied by revisionist myths denying the historicity of the Jewish people have become common place.

The lesson of this new Iran War therefore is also for the mass watermelon detractors of the West: the Jewish people are not a relic of history. They are a living nation, bound by a 3,300-year-old covenant first articulated to Abraham. The Jewish people did not disappear. They returned to sovereignty in their ancestral homeland and have proven capable of defending it. To deny their existence is not political critique; it is historical absurdity.

The confrontation with Iran has therefore become more than a regional conflict. It is, in many ways, a public reckoning, particularly for Western observers who question Israel’s legitimacy. The outcome will shape how Israel and the Jewish people are perceived for decades to come. Success may cause some critics to reconsider their cynicism. Failure would embolden those already committed to hostility. Indeed, there are figures in Western public life whose animosity appears only to intensify as Israel prevails. Only clear as day proofs may silence the wails of ignorance.

The ayatollah regime, like the Nazi regime before it, is animated by ideological absolutism. Its leaders have repeatedly declared their objective: the destruction of Israel and hostility toward the United States. As such, this evil cannot be left alone. As President Trump stated in announcing military operations:

“For 47 years, the Iranian regime has chanted ‘Death to America’ and waged an unending campaign of bloodshed and mass murder targeting the United States, our troops, and innocent people in many, many countries.”

In this sense, Iran’s revolutionary regime embodies what Amalek symbolizes: an implacable ideological hatred, particularly toward the Jewish people and any light the USA brought into the world.

A Modern Day Purim Story

I write these words amid air-raid sirens during the festival of Purim. Twenty-five centuries ago in Shushan, the Persian capital, Haman plotted the annihilation of the Jews in a single day. Through a chain of reversals, the decree collapsed. Haman was hanged on his own gallows. The Jews were granted the right to defend themselves.

This year, the Purim story feels less distant.

Analyst Yair Ansbacher has argued that October 7 was not intended as an isolated attack from Gaza, but as part of a broader Iranian design: a coordinated assault by multiple proxy militias, shielded by rocket barrages and the specter of nuclear deterrence. What was meant to be a decisive blow instead became a strategic unraveling. Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar miscalculated. Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah was eliminated. Iranian proxies weakened. The “ring of fire” Iran built around Israel gradually collapsed, leaving Tehran increasingly exposed.

Today, Iran finds itself encircled, diplomatically and militarily, by a coalition that includes Israel, the United States, and regional states that view Tehran’s ambitions as destabilizing. Whatever the ultimate outcome, Iran will not emerge unchanged.

There remains hope that a future Iranian leadership might reconnect with the deeper historical relationship between Persians and Jews – one that dates back to Cyrus the Great, who enabled the Jews’ return to Jerusalem 2500 years ago. But such outcomes cannot be prematurely engineered. Ending a war midstream will likely lead to greater instability later.

Purim teaches that history can turn suddenly. Plots collapse. The threatened endure and overcome. The aggressor finds himself isolated.

Whatever lies ahead, this conflict will reshape Israel’s regional environment and global standing. It may yet temper hostility and restore clarity about who the Jewish people are, not a transient community, not a political invention, but an ancient nation still writing its story.

Whatever outcome will be, Iran will never be the same following this war. While hopeful for a regime sympathetic to the historical amicability between the Jewish people and the Persians, it is important to allow events to play out. Stopping the war in the middle will lead to a result worse for all, including now with Hezbollah entering from Lebanon, allowing enemies to regroup for an even larger war in the future.

Modern day Purim repeats itself. It is a reminder that ideological extremism, however powerful it appears, carries within it the seeds of its own undoing.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)