On Thursday, Britain’s Telegraph published a column by the country’s commissioner for countering extremism, Robin Simcox, urging his government to crack down on Iran-run schools and mosques as well as on charities that serve as fronts for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Simcox then lamented that London is turning into “a no-go zone for Jews every weekend.” His comment, a reference to the mass anti-Israel demonstrations that take place in the city every Saturday, sparked some backlash. After all, critics pointed out, Jews also attend synagogue in central London every Saturday. Yet, Dave Rich writes, what Simcox says is not far from the truth:

[S]ome of those central London synagogues have got into the habit of changing their service times on days when there are anti-Israel demonstrations so their congregants can vacate the area before the protesters turn up; and there are usually police stationed outside, just in case. And a lot of other Jewish Londoners, the ones who live in the suburbs and might otherwise go into central London on a Saturday to shop, visit an exhibition or a museum, or do whatever other people do in central London at the weekend, will be staying at home. So maybe not a no-go zone, but also not a normal, sustainable state of affairs.

It shouldn’t be hard to understand why this is the case: . . . perhaps you are one of the hundreds of British Jews who has had “Free Palestine” shouted at you in the street by a random stranger, in an act of racist hostility because they spotted a Jew. It’s unsurprising you might not want to put yourself in that same position again, but this time with tens of thousands shouting that same slogan.

Just ask Duche Sorotzkin, who was attacked in Trafalgar Square after one march.

Other critics of Simcox pointed out that there are groups of Jews who routinely participate in the anti-Israel protests, a fact Rich finds equally unpersuasive:

The Jews who go on these demonstrations are welcomed because they support the protests, but it’s a very conditional acceptance. If you are the wrong kind of Jew, or just have the wrong kind of opinions, your treatment will be very different. . . . Jews and others are welcome so long as they don’t stray from the script.

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.