If Israel continues to “expand” its settlements in the West Bank, say supposed experts and policymakers, eventually Israelis and Palestinians will become so entangled in the small area that a two-state solution will be impossible; on this reasoning, Jerusalem is either acting against its own interests or not serious about allowing for Palestinian statehood. The next president ought at least to realize that this logic does not reflect the facts, write Elliott Abrams and Uri Sadot:

A careful look into the numbers shows that neither the population balance between Jews and Palestinians, nor the options for partition in the West Bank, have materially changed [in the past eight years]. . . .

While it is difficult to get an exact picture of population growth in the West Bank settlements, the ranges are clear. Israeli population in the settlements is growing, but at a rate that reflects mostly births in families already there, and not in-migration of new settlers. Meanwhile, the Palestinian population is also growing. . . . [Thus], in comparative terms, the demographic balance between Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank has changed very little since Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu’s entry to office.

Considering all these data, the working assumptions guiding President Obama’s policy—as well as the administration’s alarmist predictions—were simply and flatly wrong. Settlement expansion is not speedily gobbling up the West Bank, nor has it killed off chances for peace. Nor is the status quo about to fray. . . .

[Contrary to the Obama administration’s claims], in the past eight years Israeli settlements have grown at a slow but steady rate, not the huge and dangerous expansion the president has been warning us about. . . .

The Trump administration should discourage Israel from investing in and populating isolated settlements, as there is simply no strategic logic for doing so. But far more important would be to focus on the final-status issues that actually matter most—like the so-called “right of return” for Palestinian refugees, the future of Jerusalem, and security in areas that Hamas or even Islamic State may try to seize in the future. Those issues remain the fundamental barriers to negotiating a lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

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.