At Berkeley, Jews Are Becoming the Protesters Rather than the Protested

Since the February anti-Semitic riot at Berkeley, Jewish students are no longer waiting passively for administrators to protect them and dole out justice to the rioters but are taking matters into their own hands. So David Schraub, a law professor and frequent commentator on American Jewish matters who earned a PhD at Berkeley, reports.

“A few other developments have occurred since [the riot], both of which entail Jews becoming the protesters, rather than the protested,” he writes.

First, my friend and former colleague Ron Hassner has begun a sit-in in his own office, refusing to leave until the Berkeley administration takes action regarding a series of demands he’s made regarding how to address campus anti-Semitism. Second, a large group of Berkeley Jewish students marched on Sather Gate, where a different group of pro-Palestinian students had been blocking passage as part of their own protest (and reportedly have been haranguing Jewish students in the vicinity).

This marks a significant change from how Jews on campus have acted in the past:

This is an interesting example of Jews adopting what I termed a “protest politic”—seeking change via the medium of a protest (as opposed to, say, a board resolution, letter to the editor, or political hearings). . . . While I personally am averse to protests (not on general political or tactical grounds; it’s a temperamental preference), it does seem that acting via protest—sit-ins, marches, or even disruption—[is] a way of marking yourself as being of a particular political class on campus and so a way of being taken seriously.

Read more at Debate Link

More about: Anti-Semitism, Berkeley, Israel & Zionism, Politics & Current Affairs

Hizballah Is Learning Israel’s Weak Spots

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.

Read more at Ynet

More about: Hizballah, Iron Dome, Israeli Security