After two Jewish fencers, Jackie Dubrovich and Maia Weintraub, helped the U.S. women’s foil team (of which they made up half) win a gold medal at the Paris Olympics, this newsletter linked to a fascinating essay about Hungarian Jewish fencing champions from 2000. Of course, the most famous Hungarian Jewish fencer was not an Olympian at all, but Theodor Herzl, whose resignation from an elite fencing club at the University of Vienna over increasing anti-Semitism was a key turning point in his political development.

Dovi Safier was likewise inspired by the Olympics to look into this bit of Jewish history and, in particular, the story of the three-time Hungarian Olympic fencing champion Attila Petschauer. In 1932, Petschauer came to Los Angeles for the Olympics, where, Safier writes, he and his teammates “were greeted like heroes.”

Jews of Hungarian origin came out en masse to greet them and wined and dined them throughout their stay. Many prominent figures in Hollywood at the time were Jewish. Adolph Zukor, one of the three founders of Paramount Pictures, was a Hungarian Jew; William Fox (born Wilhelm Fried Fuchs), founder of Fox Film Corporation, was another.

Petschauer, moonlighting as a newspaper correspondent during the games, found himself both fascinated and bewildered by the peculiarities of America: “The tenth Olympiad is the Olympics of interpreters. Los Angeles echoes with 50 languages, making ancient Babel seem quaint.”

In 1942, Petschauer was part of a Jewish battalion of slave laborers sent to the eastern front. When the High Holy Days came around, he reportedly led the prayers, which he remembered by heart—and then performed a comic impersonation of the Budapest chief rabbi delivering a sermon. He died shortly thereafter from the harsh conditions.

Below, today’s newsletter will return to some other reflections on the one-year anniversary of the outbreak of the current war, but first something must be said of its recent progress. Israel has kept up its aerial and ground assault on Hizballah, and may have already killed the successor to Hassan Nasrallah, the longtime leader it eliminated less than two weeks ago. Matthew Levitt assesses the current state of the Lebanon-based terrorist group, which, in his view, is now “a shadow of its former self.” Indeed, he adds,

it is no exaggeration to say that the Hizballah of two weeks ago no longer exists. And since Hizballah was the backbone of Iran’s network of militant proxies, its so-called axis of resistance, Iran’s strategy of arming and deploying proxy groups throughout the region is suddenly at risk as well.

Hizballah’s attacks put increasing pressure on Israel, as intended, only that pressure did not lead Israelis to stop targeting Hamas so much as it chipped away at Israel’s fears about the cost of military action to address the military threats posed by Hizballah.

At the same time, Levitt explains, Hizballah still poses a serious threat, as it demonstrated last night when its missiles struck Haifa and Tiberias, injuring at least two people:

Hizballah still maintains an arsenal of rockets and a cadre of several thousand fighters. It will continue to pose potent military threats for Israel, Lebanon, and the wider region.

How will the group seek to avenge Nasrallah’s death amid these military setbacks? Hizballah is likely to resort to acts of international terrorism, which are overseen by one of the few elements of the group that has not yet lost key leaders.

But the true measure of whether the group will be able to reconstitute itself, even over many years, is whether Iran can restock Hizballah’s sophisticated arsenal. Tehran’s network of proxy groups—from Hizballah to Hamas to the Houthis—is only as dangerous as it is today because of Iran’s provision of weapons and money. Whatever Hizballah does next, Western governments must prioritize cutting off Tehran’s ability to arm and fund its proxies.