As refugees from the Middle East and North Africa try desperately to get into Europe, the nearby and wealthy Arab states of the Persian Gulf refuse to absorb any of them, claiming, among other things, that “it is not right for us to accept a people that are different from us.” It is only the poorest Arab states, Denis MacEoin notes, that have taken in refugees—“and there are other ironies” as well:

According to [one report], Syrian refugees now safely in Italy still believe that their greatest enemy is not the Assad regime, the rebel fighters, Islamic State, or the Gulf states, but Israel. . . . In the meantime—which is where the irony lies—IsraAID, the main Israeli international relief organization, is helping Arab refugees in Greece and is in talks with the Greek government to set up a long-term presence there. . . . According to [an IsraAID official, the organization] “is already working in Jordan and the Kurdish region of Iraq to help them absorb Syrian refugees.” . . .

So here is the greatest of the many ironies we have seen here. The greatest enemy of the Arabs (by their definition . . . ) is part of an international effort to assist the resettlement of the Syrian refugees, while [Saudi Arabia], their self-proclaimed greatest friend, the nation that boasts of being the leader of the Islamic world, turns them aside in pursuit of profit and a gargantuan lack of humanity. . . .

This crisis . . . demonstrates the abject failure of the EU, the United Nations, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, or anybody else to criticize the bloated nations of the Gulf with even a tiny fraction of the abuse they pour daily on the only democratic state in the Middle East, Israel. It is a repetition of the ongoing Palestinian refugee crisis, with the Arab states refusing to give jobs and citizenship to Palestinian Arabs over decades, keeping them in refugee camps, and laying the blame on Israel.

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.