At his meeting with Donald Trump earlier this month, Benjamin Netanyahu sought support for Israel’s formal annexation of the Golan, a territory it has held since 1967. Zvi Hauser argues that such a move would benefit both Israel and the U.S. (Free registration required.)

International recognition of Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan, which makes up only 1 percent of what was until recently Syria, isn’t only in Israel’s interest, but above all in the interest of all those who wish to stabilize the region and block Iran’s growing influence in it. [Moreover], the moderate Sunni states won’t fight a move that means exacting a territorial price from the Shiite axis of evil.

[Ultimately], reality on the ground is stronger than past fixations. There is no horizon on the Golan Heights but the Israeli one. Neither [allowing] radical Sunni factions [in Syria to take the territory] nor [letting] the Iran-Hizballah-Assad alliance establish a foothold on the Sea of Galilee will contribute to stabilizing the region and rehabilitating it.

The international community must come to terms with the geostrategic implications of the Middle East’s collapse. The Middle East’s borders as we knew them in the last century are evaporating before our eyes. Recognizing Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan is a self-evident move in reshaping the region by the demarcation [of new borders]—especially in the Syrian-Iraqi area, which has irreversibly changed. . . .

American recognition of Israel’s sovereignty in the Golan . . . is a historic opportunity to coordinate expectations with the international community, under the leadership of the American administration and Congress.

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.