Early this year, after long and arduous negotiations, representatives of the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform denominations, together with figures from the Israeli government, worked out a compromise to allow for mixed-sex prayer at the Western Wall. The agreement, however, was tabled before going into effect due to opposition from ultra-Orthodox parties in the Knesset and is now in danger of being jettisoned completely. To Natan Sharansky—who, as head of the Jewish Agency, was the prime architect of the deal—doing so could cause lasting damage:

[T]he compromise reached over the Wall was truly remarkable. . . . [It] granted legitimacy to non-Orthodox communities while acknowledging that Orthodoxy remains Israel’s de-facto religious common denominator. The proposed arrangement, in turn, received the support of a huge majority of the Israeli government. Each of the parties to this unprecedented agreement understood something that their respective constituencies tend to overlook.

On one side, the representatives of the Israeli religious and political establishments recognized that Reform and Conservative Jewry are not fringe sects, as some in Israel seem to imagine, but important venues for large numbers of Jews who reject the strictures of Orthodoxy yet want to remain part of the Jewish people. . . .

For their part, the non-Orthodox parties to the agreement recognized that Orthodoxy’s preeminence in Israel is not an accident. Rather, it stems from the historic need for a unifying religious force in the Jewish state. . . .

[T]o abandon the Wall agreement now is to legitimate extremism, to alienate large groups of fellow Jews, and to allow discord to poison our public life further. . . . Anyone who cares about the future of the Jewish people should care about this issue.

For more than a year, the Iran-backed Houthis have been launching drones and missiles at ships traversing the Red Sea, as well as at Israeli territory, in support of Hamas. This development has drastically curtailed shipping through the Suez Canal and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, driving up trade prices. This week, the Trump administration began an extensive bombing campaign against the Houthis in an effort to reopen that crucial waterway. Burcu Ozcelik highlights another benefit of this action:

The administration has a broader geopolitical agenda—one that includes countering China’s economic leverage, particularly Beijing’s reliance on Iranian oil. By targeting the Houthis, the United States is not only safeguarding vital shipping lanes but also exerting pressure on the Iran-China energy nexus, a key component of Beijing’s strategic posture in the region.

China was the primary destination for up to 90 percent of Iran’s oil exports in 2024, underscoring the deepening economic ties between Beijing and Tehran despite U.S. sanctions. By helping fill Iranian coffers, China aids Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in financing proxies like the Houthis. Since October of last year, notable U.S. Treasury announcements have revealed covert links between China and the Houthis.

Striking the Houthis could trigger broader repercussions—not least by disrupting the flow of Iranian oil to China. While difficult to confirm, it is conceivable and has been reported, that the Houthis may have received financial or other forms of compensation from China (such as Chinese-made military components) in exchange for allowing freedom of passage for China-affiliated vessels in the Red Sea.