Between terrorism and outright warfare, Israel has developed a good deal of finesse in dealing with crisis. Such finesse can be seen both in the policies of the government and its officials and, more importantly, in the resilience of the citizenry. Tevi Troy draws some lessons for America and its leaders:

First, resilience is not a given; it can and should be built and enhanced continuously in advance [of disaster]. . . . [S]trong societal resilience provides the primary leverage for countering terror and attenuating its intended impact.

The preparation and thought Israel puts into resilience means that the kind of citywide shutdowns that took place after the Boston marathon bombings would be unthinkable in Israel. Attacks take place, and far too often, but the citizens move on. The American president must lead by example and make sure that even if the U.S. is attacked, life goes on, and [show] that terror cannot defeat the will to live, and to fight.

Cyber-attacks are another reality of modern life—and of disaster preparedness. A massive cyber-attack on America’s power grid or transportation network could have devastating consequences nationwide. Here again, Israel can provide a model. Israel regularly experiences attempted cyber disruptions during flare-ups in conflicts with terror groups like Hamas. . . . The Israeli Defense Forces even have a division specifically dedicated to cyber defense. According to the unnamed head of that division, in [the 2014 Gaza war], “for the first time, there was an organized cyber-defense effort alongside combat operations in the field. This was a new reality.”

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.