For most of its existence since 1948, Israel has had the support of most Jews in the US. There were dissident voices, especially among Jewish members of socialist and communist organisations. And the radicalisation of young people in the 1960s resulted in a layer of young Jews questioning Israeli policies towards Palestinians and Israel’s support for apartheid South Africa and the US Vietnam War. But most Jewish people in the US continued to support Israel.

That is beginning to change, on different levels. This is important because US imperialism’s military and economic support for Israel is key to the maintenance of the Jewish-supremacist state. As more US Jews speak out to one degree or another in opposition to Israeli policies, they can have an impact.

The emergence and growth of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) is an important indicator. “We represent a growing portion of Jewish Americans. Israel claims to be acting in the name of the Jewish people, so we are compelled to make sure the world knows that many Jews are opposed to their actions. There are often attempts to silence critics of Israel by conflating legitimate criticism with anti-Semitism. Israel is a state, not a person. Everyone has the right to criticise unjust actions of a state.”

JVP was started by three undergraduate students at the University of California at Berkeley in 1996. In 2007, its members decided to expand it into a national organisation of mostly volunteer activists, funded by grassroots supporters, in order to be more effective.

After going national, the group grew. JVP has taken off in the last three years, increasing its full-time paid staff to 28. It now has more than 60 activist chapters and more than 200,000 online supporters. Plans to expand membership and staff in 2016 are in the works.

One aspect of JVP’s work is coalition building, including with Arab, Iranian, Muslim and Christian organisations. When a diverse coalition of Palestinian civil society organisations called for an international boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign in 2005, JVP increased its involvement in many boycott and divestment campaigns. Supporting BDS in action and not just words sets JVP apart from most other Jewish peace groups.

Another thing that puts JVP in the vanguard among Jewish groups is its assertion that “a just and comprehensive peace between Israelis and Palestinians can only happen through acknowledgement of the Nakba [‘catastrophe’ in Arabic] of 1947-9, which led to the creation of millions of Palestinian refugees”.

On the key question of the right of return of Palestinians, the group says that it “supports the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including the right of people to return to their countries. Peace will only be possible when Israel acknowledges the Palestinian refugees’ right of return and negotiates a mutually agreed, just solution based on principles established in international law including return, compensation and/or resettlement”.

With such positions, it is no wonder that supporters of the Jewish-supremacist state attack Jewish Voice for Peace, as they do all who criticise Israel. The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the Anti-Defamation League are among the most vocal.

Another indication of many US Jews breaking with unconditional support to Israeli policies has been bitter divisions over the international deal on Iran’s nuclear program. “Debate on Iran fiercely splits American Jews”, was a headline in the New York Times. The article talked about sharp discussions in Jewish congregations and organisations. This even extended to attacks on Jewish members of Congress who supported the deal, including that they were “kapo” – the term for a Jew who collaborated with Nazis in the death camps.

AIPAC, a lobby group with very deep pockets, spent tens of millions in efforts to kill the deal, an effort that ultimately failed. The Times noted that this signalled a diminution in the power of the lobby. Polls indicate that only a minority of US Jews, especially among the younger generation, opposed the deal.

The difference between Washington and the Israeli government over the Iran deal was real. Obama wanted to pull back from a confrontation with Iran that could lead to war, while Netanyahu wanted to step up that confrontation in the hopes of attacking Iran.

The whole issue of Iran’s nuclear program was presented in hyped and false terms by both the US and Israel, as if an Iranian bomb would pose a threat to either. Noam Chomsky has pointed to a CIA analysis which said that, if Iran did get a few bombs, they would be for use as a deterrent, not an offensive weapon. The image of the US, with its vast nuclear armaments, the country that started the atomic arms race and the only country ever to use such weapons against not one but two cities, quaking in fear of Iran, is ridiculous. Similarly, Israel is armed to the teeth with hundreds of nuclear weapons. Any offensive use of a nuclear weapon by Iran would lead to its immediate vaporisation.

What the US and Israel fear is such a deterrent, which would constrain the military aggression of both “rogue states” in the region, in Chomsky’s words.

The division between the US and Israel over the Iran deal doesn’t mean any change in Washington’s support of Israel. Indeed, Obama indicated renewed and extended military and financial backing of the imperialist outpost in the Middle East.