Noting that the presidential candidate has expressed contempt for NATO, that several of his advisers have close ties with Vladimir Putin, and that Putin’s court philosopher Aleksandr Dugin has endorsed him, Robert Zubrin argues that a Trump administration is likely to adopt the current White House’s callous attitude toward U.S. alliances. Zubrin takes Poland and Israel as his prime examples:

Russian military [threats] against Poland and the Baltic states were greatly enhanced by the failure of the Obama administration to honor America’s commitment to defend Ukraine with more than token support. Trump’s adviser Carter Page, however, has attacked Obama for defending Ukraine too strongly. . . .

Another country that a Trump administration would place in existential danger is Israel. While Trump’s statement that he would act as a neutral arbiter between Israel and the Palestinians has received some attention, the much greater threat to the Jewish state comes from Trump’s desire to align America with Putin’s Russia. This is so because Russia’s Middle East strategy is centered on building up an Iranian empire stretching from Lebanon to Afghanistan as a powerful junior partner to Moscow in the planned Eurasian bloc. . . .

Consistent with his pro-Putin tilt, Trump has stated that the United States should back the Russian-Iranian client Bashar al-Assad, as [President Obama has]. Thus a Trump administration offers Israel the terrifying prospect of a nuclear-armed Iranian regional hegemon, stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Hindu Kush, backed by Russia and unopposed by the United States. A Trump presidency could lead to the end of Poland’s independence and of Israel’s existence.

On Tuesday, a Hizballah drone attack injured three people in northern Israel. The next day, another attack, targeting an IDF base, injured eighteen people, six of them seriously, in Arab al-Amshe, also in the north. This second attack involved the simultaneous use of drones carrying explosives and guided antitank missiles. In both cases, the defensive systems that performed so successfully last weekend failed to stop the drones and missiles. Ron Ben-Yishai has a straightforward explanation as to why: the Lebanon-backed terrorist group is getting better at evading Israel defenses. He explains the three basis systems used to pilot these unmanned aircraft, and their practical effects:

These systems allow drones to act similarly to fighter jets, using “dead zones”—areas not visible to radar or other optical detection—to approach targets. They fly low initially, then ascend just before crashing and detonating on the target. The terrain of southern Lebanon is particularly conducive to such attacks.

But this requires skills that the terror group has honed over months of fighting against Israel. The latest attacks involved a large drone capable of carrying over 50 kg (110 lbs.) of explosives. The terrorists have likely analyzed Israel’s alert and interception systems, recognizing that shooting down their drones requires early detection to allow sufficient time for launching interceptors.

The IDF tries to detect any incoming drones on its radar, as it had done prior to the war. Despite Hizballah’s learning curve, the IDF’s technological edge offers an advantage. However, the military must recognize that any measure it takes is quickly observed and analyzed, and even the most effective defenses can be incomplete. The terrain near the Lebanon-Israel border continues to pose a challenge, necessitating technological solutions and significant financial investment.