A terrorist attack at the Temple Mount last month led Israel to install metal detectors and other security measures at the site, which in turn led to Palestinian demonstrations and rioting, which died down after Israel removed the metal detectors. The initial incident, writes Yossi Kuperwasser, was the first “in many years” that “involved a relatively extensive organization that planned a very complex operation at the most sensitive spot.” To Kuperwasser, the entire episode played in to Mahmoud Abbas’s hands:

Through his formal control of the religious establishment in Jerusalem, Abbas made use of the Mufti Muhammad Hussein (whom he himself appointed) to dictate the nature of the struggle [against the metal detectors] and set the conditions for ending it. It was Abbas who decided that the struggle would be the “popular resistance” he favors, meaning it would mainly involve prayers and demonstrations with limited violence and without firearms. Abbas deployed protestors and ostensibly punitive measures against Israel such as [purportedly] halting security coordination and civilian contacts.

It was also he who insisted that Israel remove all the security devices [at the Mount] and did not settle for Jordan’s achievement in getting only the metal detectors removed. And it was Abbas who, after he got Israel to accept his terms, stood at the mufti’s side while he announced that prayer on the Temple Mount had resumed.

Abbas saw Israel’s capitulation in revoking the security measures as a morale-booster for the Palestinians and as a great personal achievement. He has hastened to translate it into several operational goals: stepped-up pressure on Hamas; a change for the better in his public status, among other things by hosting [Jordan’s] King Abdullah in Ramallah and convening the Palestinian National Council as a show of support for his leadership; an attempt to extract further gains from Israel by posing additional conditions for renewing security coordination; and an easing of the American pressure, while criticizing the new administration for its conduct toward the Palestinians thus far. . . .

The Palestinians are caught up in a sense of achievement, which inspires them to harden their positions. . . . Such an atmosphere does not encourage a Palestinian willingness to renew negotiations without prior conditions.

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.