23 Jun BEYOND THE EUPHORIA: BETWEEN THE “FAILURE” OF THE BIBLICAL CYRUS (KORESH) AND THE POLITICAL REVERSALS OF DONALD TRUMP

When History
Meets Political
Theology
During Donald
Trump’s first term as
President of the
United States, particularly after his historic
recognition of Yerushalayim as Israel’s
capital and the relocation of the U.S. Embassy
there, a bold comparison became widespread
among American Evangelicals and
conservative circles in Israel: Trump was the
“modern Cyrus.”
Israel’s Prime Minister repeatedly echoed
this idea, portraying Trump as the Cyrus of
our generation.
Cyrus the Great, the ancient king of Persia,
occupies a unique place in Jewish national
memory as the model of a foreign ruler who
was miraculously chosen by the Hashem to
bring an end to the Babylonian exile, facilitate
the return to Zion, and authorize the
rebuilding of the Second Temple. The parallel
seemed obvious: in both cases, the leader of
the world’s dominant superpower—someone
neither Jewish nor connected to Jewish life—
advanced a dramatic geopolitical decision in
favor of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of
Israel.
Yet while the initial comparison focused on
the positive developments and political
euphoria, a closer examination of historical
and Talmudic sources reveals a far more
complex picture. Our Sages teach that
Cyrus’s story did not end with his famous
declaration. The continuation of the narrative
is marked by retreat, political pressure, and a
sharp change in policy—a process described
in the Talmud (Rosh Hashanah 3b) as “Cyrus
soured” (החמיץ כורש(, meaning that he
ultimately withdrew from his grand
commitments.
“Cyrus Was a Righteous King” (Rosh
Hashanah 3b)
Cyrus’s promises to the Jewish people are
described extensively at the beginning of the
Book of Ezra.
His declaration contained four central
commitments:
1. Permission to Return to the Land of Israel
and Rebuild the Temple
Cyrus granted religious and national
autonomy and called upon the Jews to return
to Yerushalayim and rebuild the Bet
Hamikdash.
“Thus says Cyrus king of Persia: Hashem has
given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and
He has charged me to build Him a house in
Yerushalayim, which is in Yeudah. Whoever
among you is of all His people—may Hashem
be with him—and let him go up to
Yerushalayim, which is in Yeudah, and build
the House of the G-d of Israel.” (Ezra 1:2–3)

2. Financial Support for the Returnees
The king decreed that those who remained in
Babylon, together with the local inhabitants,
should provide financial assistance to those
returning to Zion.
“And whoever remains in any place where he
sojourns, let the people of that place assist
him with silver and gold, goods and livestock,
together with freewill offerings for the House
of Hashem in Yerushalayim.” (Ezra 1:4)
3. Restoration of the Temple Vessels
Cyrus ordered the return of the sacred gold
and silver vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had
taken from the First Temple and placed in
Babylonian temples.
“King Cyrus brought out the vessels of the
House of Hashem that Nebuchadnezzar had
carried away from Yerushalayim… He
counted them out to Sheshbazzar, the prince
of Yeudah… All the vessels of gold and silver
numbered five thousand four hundred.” (Ezra
1:7–11)
4. Financing the Construction from the
Imperial Treasury
Later an official memorandum preserved in
the royal archives at Ecbatana. There we
discover another extraordinary promise:
direct imperial funding for the rebuilding
project.
“In the first year of King Cyrus, King Cyrus
issued a decree: Let the House of Hashem in
Yerushalayim be rebuilt… and let the
expenses be paid from the royal treasury.”
(Ezra 6:3)
Cyrus Reversed Course
The Gmara (Rosh Hashanah 3a–b) states that
Cyrus, who began as a righteous king with
tremendous merit, eventually “soured”—that
is, he corrupted his conduct and retreated
from his earlier commitments. He yielded to
pressure from provincial governors and
neighboring nations, suspended active
support for the Temple project, and effectively
halted construction until the reign of King
Daryavesh.
The Book of Ezra recounts how neighboring
peoples became alarmed by Jewish
resurgence and flooded the Persian court with
complaints, warnings, and accusations.
Cyrus, whose primary obligation was the
stability of his empire, ultimately yielded to
those pressures.
In order to understand how Cyrus’s failed to
deliver on his promises, one must first
examine the biblical and Talmudic sources.
Ezra (perek 4) describes how, immediately
following Cyrus’s proclamation and the
beginning of the return to Zion, “the
adversaries of Yeudah and Binyamin”—the
Samaritans and other neighboring peoples—
began pressuring the Persian administration.
They sent accusations and denunciations to

the royal court, warning
that the Jews were a
rebellious nation and that
rebuilding Yerushalayim
and the Temple would
threaten Persian
sovereignty and reduce tax
revenues.
As a result of these
pressures, construction
was halted.
The Dynamics of Donald
Trump
In the modern arena,
Donald Trump represents a
political phenomenon
characterized by extreme
realism combined with
inherent unpredictability.
Trump operates according to the doctrine of
“America First.” His foreign-policy
decisions—whether favorable or unfavorable
to Israel—are driven not by a longstanding
ideological commitment to the Jewish people,
but by a combination of domestic political
considerations, including satisfying his base
and major donors, together with a calculation
of immediate costs and benefits for the
United States.
When interests change, or when powerful
counter pressures arise from business
partners, Arab states, or electoral
considerations, policy can shift rapidly and
dramatically. This tendency creates a pattern
in which absolute promises may later become
firm demands—or even evolve into a retreat
from previous commitments.
Cyrus and Trump
The comparison between Cyrus the Great and
Donald Trump requires little interpretive
effort; it practically leaps from the headlines.
Cyrus’s defining moment was his historic
proclamation granting the Jews religious
autonomy, encouraging their return to
Yerushalayim, and promising royal funding
for the rebuilding of the Second Temple.
Trump’s parallel moment came some 2,500
years later with his recognition of Jerusalem
as Israel’s capital, the relocation of the
American embassy, and the promotion of the
Abraham Accords, which reshaped the
Middle East.
In both eras, the Jewish people experienced a
rare moment of political euphoria and a sense
that a great world leader stood firmly at their
side.
External Pressures and the Great Turning
Point
The true test of leadership comes when
interests shift and political pressures begin to
mount.
This dynamic of reversal is familiar to anyone

who follows Donald Trump’s political
conduct.
Just as Cyrus altered his policy in response to
intelligence reports and provincial pressures,
Trump has repeatedly demonstrated
significant flexibility. This has included
statements that Israel must “finish the war
quickly” due to concerns over international
image, willingness to engage in direct
negotiations with Iran, and comments from
senior figures in his administration—
including Vice President J.D. Vance—
emphasizing that the interests of Washington
and Jerusalem do not always align.
Conclusion and Lessons
The analogy between Cyrus and Trump
through the lens of “reversal” is not intended
to diminish the historic contributions both
leaders made to the Jewish people and the
State of Israel. Cyrus’s declaration, like the
relocation of the American embassy to
Jerusalem, remains a landmark geopolitical
achievement.
Nevertheless, the historical and moral lesson
of the comparison is both profound and
enduring.
“Put Not Your Trust in the generous”
The sources remind us that leaders of great
powers, however friendly they may appear,
ultimately act according to the interests of
their own nations.
From a spiritual perspective, one might argue
that the reversal in policy serves as a reminder
that our ultimate trust cannot rest in political
power. There were those who felt that with
strong support in the White House, America
would always stand ready to save and protect
Israel from its enemies.
Such outlook risks diminishing the
fundamental obligation to place our trust in
the Creator alone.
This echoes the teaching of the Sages
regarding the era preceding the coming of
Mashiach: “We have no one upon whom to
rely except our Father in Heaven.”