Ratified in 1215, the Magna Carta laid the foundation for the English constitution and inspired many modern ideas of civil rights and limited government. The document contained two clauses restricting Jewish creditors’ ability to collect from the estates of deceased debtors. Derek Taylor explains:

[T]hese clauses were [in part] aimed at the king himself. The reason lies in the peculiar relationship that existed between Jews and the crown. Jews and all they owned had come to be regarded as the property of the king. This meant that he could tax them at will and could seize the wealth of any Jew on his death—a clever arrangement, as far as the king was concerned, because it enabled him to share legitimately in the immense profits of [moneylending], a practice prohibited [to Christians] by the Christian church. So the clauses in the Magna Carta that restricted the Jews’ income from financial transactions also had the indirect effect of limiting the benefits the king could receive as the ultimate owner of Jews’ property.

But this bizarre relationship between Jewry and royalty was not without its benefits for Jews. The king offered his special protection to them. It was, after all, in his economic interest to do so. However, that protection could not always be relied upon.

In 1290, that protection was rescinded when the English monarchy expelled all the Jews from its lands.

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.