According to a recent report by a Palestinian news agency, the Palestinian Authority (PA) regularly employs various forms of torture at its detention centers. But, writes Elliott Abrams, many normally so solicitous of Palestinian wellbeing, and abnormally so alert to alleged Israeli misbehavior, have kept silent:

This is not the first time such allegations have been made against both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. What’s worth noting is the reaction from Washington and among the donors to the PA: silence. And what’s even more noteworthy is the reaction from the innumerable groups attacking Israel for human-rights violations: more silence. Such abuses, which would arouse a global round of denunciations if Israel acted this way, arouse yawns when committed by the PA.

There are some lessons here. One, as noted, is that official Palestinian human-rights abuses get next to zero attention. Another lesson is that this immunity carries a price—and the price is paid by Palestinians. Instead of evolving steadily toward a more democratic political system that respects human rights, the Palestinian system has stalled. There are no elections, there are widespread human-rights abuses, there are few or no corrective mechanisms, and there is global indifference. Governments and organizations that say they want to help build peace in the Middle East should realize that withholding criticism of the PA . . . is not a way forward. It is a guarantee that . . . conditions in the West Bank will continue to deteriorate.

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.