The Knesset recently considered a bill that would declare the Jewish state’s sovereignty over the West Bank. While the idea is gaining traction on the Israeli right, Efraim Inbar argues that it is a bad one, and a distraction from more pressing matters:

The Jewish state’s enforcement agencies have difficulty trying to enforce the country’s decisions within Israel’s sovereign territory. Only some of the government’s decisions are actually carried out. Tens of thousands of demolition orders of illegally built homes [by Palestinians] remain written on paper without being implemented. There are even some areas in the country where police officers hesitate to exercise their authority. In other words, Israel suffers from a governance problem that stems from the political system’s lack of resolve. The politicians try to avoid confrontations that carry political repercussions, and there are not enough policemen or inspectors for effective law enforcement. This phenomenon is the result not of a lack of sovereignty but of governance shortcomings.

Therefore, without effective governance, there is no point in deciding to expand the domain of Israeli sovereignty. Even today, the Israeli government has the necessary legal authority to prevent illegal home construction in Area C, [the part of the West Bank that, pursuant to the Oslo Accords, is under direct Israeli control]. . . . Yet Israel refrains from demolishing many illegal buildings in Area C. . . .

Declaring sovereignty over Judea and Samaria also exceeds the limits of the Israeli consensus. Applying Israeli law in Judea and Samaria does not command the support of the majority of Israelis, . . . [unlike] the consensus on applying Israeli law to the Old City in Jerusalem and to the Golan Heights.

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.