Regardless of who wins the upcoming presidential election, writes Ed Husain, a segment of the American left that has made common cause with radical Islam is likely to gain more influence in the Democratic party. This unlikely alliance is exemplified by Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, who comprise half of the “Squad”—a group of young congresswomen who represent the new face of the Democrats’ left flank.

This intersection has put aside their deep divergences on God, religion, family, homosexuality, and the role of women and united their activist base on campuses and community hubs in their shared hatred for Western history and capitalism. This counterintuitive union, which I have called the “Red-Green Alliance,” is similar to the revolutionary mindset that saw Iranian left-Islamists come together before 1979 with the encouragement of the French philosopher Michel Foucault. In Britain, Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labor party leader, had a similar Red-Green alliance last year with a view to winning the general election with 30 Muslim-influenced constituencies—only to lose disastrously.

But when push comes to shove, Islamism and “wokeness” do not mix. Iran’s Islamists killed thousands and exiled leftists. In Gaza, Hamas hanged leftists from tall buildings. Ask Egyptian feminists how the Islamists in Egypt treated them after the 2011 uprisings. Islamists debated in Parliament to reduce the age of consent for marriage for women from eighteen to nine.

[Moreover], the Red-Green Alliance wants to tear down the alliances of safety and stability that America and the West have supported in the Middle East. Omar has repeatedly attacked Egypt and the Gulf states. Yet the real risks of a Muslim Brotherhood-led, sexist, homophobic, and anti-Semitic government in Libya or Sudan have not seemed to trouble her and her allies.

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.