In the past four years, there has been increasing reason to believe that Orthodox Jewry is becoming a political force to be reckoned with, despite its relatively small numbers—and in a way that the overall Jewish population is not. The recent election appears to confirm that this is so, as Armin Rosen explains:

Even before precinct data were available, there was strong circumstantial evidence that there had been historic turnout in Orthodox communities across New York and New Jersey and that the benefits had been largely—though by no means solely—reaped by the Republican party. Republicans have likely flipped a state senate seat in a southern Brooklyn district that includes Orthodox and Syrian Jewish areas, as well as state senate and assembly districts in Rockland County that include large ḥasidic enclaves. A Republican took an unexpected election night lead for an open state assembly seat in the disproportionately Orthodox [Long Island town of] Great Neck.

In the city, Orthodox Jews are often registered Democrats, since general elections aren’t usually competitive and nearly all of the city’s meaningful politics take place within the Democratic party itself—thus the conservative and Trump-supporting Dov Hikind represented southern Brooklyn in the state assembly as a Democrat for over 30 years. . . . But Tuesday’s results hint that the Orthodox connection to the party is now largely tactical.

In [the current] landscape of ambiguity, the Orthodox are a rare unambiguous winner. . . . In New York City, the rise of a more reliable and cross-partisan Orthodox vote has far-reaching implications. A recently introduced term-limits measure means that 34 of 48 City Council seats will become vacant next year—much to nearly everyone’s delight, Mayor Bill de Blasio will be term-limited out of office as well. This year’s state senate, state assembly, and congressional results in southern Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island show that New York City isn’t quite as monolithically blue as believed. The Orthodox represent a potential swing vote in future elections, coming from a community that just turned out in massive numbers.

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.