Europe’s presidents and prime ministers have shown themselves willing to make speeches condemning anti-Semitism and expressing solidarity with Jews, but at the same time they are often supportive of anti-Israel policies and declarations that only legitimize anti-Semitism. Fiamma Nirentstein comments:

Hungary and the Czech Republic made great strides against anti-Semitism by abstaining from the UN General Assembly’s 2017 vote that condemned Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. A stand against anti-Semitism was [also] made by the six European member states . . . that opposed a resolution by the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy Josep Borrell earlier this month that called for a joint European condemnation of Trump’s Middle East peace plan. Through their opposition, they opened a real discussion about Israel’s security needs and the legality of the settlements.

Anti-Semitism cannot be defeated so long as the EU continues to authorize anti-Israel incitement by making claims about the “illegality” of the settlements and presents the “Green Line” armistice demarcation as a border for two states. In this manner, the central European authority shows a refusal to protect Israel from unending and active terrorism and warfare while insisting upon an inconsistent and unfounded definition of “illegality.” The settlements are not illegal; they are disputed. They are [located in a territory that is] an essential part of the cradle of Jewish history. By completely ignoring this last point, the EU promotes instead the idea of Jewish colonialism, with collateral slaughters, genocide, apartheid—all anti-Semitic canards.

The only way to fight [anti-Semitism] is through policy action: . . . stopping the discriminatory labeling of Israeli products sold in Europe, abolishing blacklists of businesses active in the disputed territories, and [combating] the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

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.