Currently, the grounds where the Sobibor death camp once stood are treated like a public park, where locals go to ride bicycles, take a stroll, walk their dogs—or dig in the dirt for bricks and other artifacts. Meanwhile, a group of archaeologists is excavating the site and plans are under way to create a memorial and museum. Some fear, however, that the latter effort will also cheapen the memory of the camp’s horrors. Matt Lebovic writes:

In the months ahead, large-scale construction will transform Sobibor forever, as authorities enact a long-incubated plan to build a museum, visitor center, and various memorial structures throughout the camp. “We don’t want this to become the Disneyland of death camps,” said Jonny Daniels, founder and executive director of the Poland-based From the Depths organization. “The treatment of this place as one where pets relieve themselves, in addition to the construction of huge new buildings on top of camp remains, is very disturbing. . . . You can’t build in a concentration camp.”

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.