The Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich visited the U.S. last week, where he was given the cold shoulder both by the Biden administration and by some Jewish organizations. Setting aside these particular controversies, Yaakov Katz turns instead to one aspect of Smotrich’s trip that has received considerable attention in Hebrew-language media:

In a video circulating all over the Internet, Smotrich is seen giving a speech in what can only be described as broken English. Words are swallowed and sentences are garbled. Some of the words he can’t even pronounce, trying two or three times to get them right.

Clearly, Smotrich’s English is not at a high level. And what we need to understand is that this is fine. He is an Israeli politician and until now, his roles have all had a domestic focus. He has not needed to speak English publicly.

The question that needs to be asked is why did he even try? Why did Smotrich not speak in Hebrew and have a simultaneous translation. . . . Israeli politicians need to realize that there is nothing wrong with speaking their native and authentic language of Hebrew. That is the language they know and using it is how they can be most articulate. When Angela Merkel used to address the UN, did she speak English or German? When Emmanuel Macron speaks there, he addresses the audience in French, not English. It is the same when it comes to Arab leaders and so many more.

For some reason, Israeli politicians feel the need to try to do something that their foreign counterparts do not. . . . They [should instead] take pride in their native tongue and speak Hebrew without shame.

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.