Israel has implemented increasingly strict measures to combat the coronavirus; as of yesterday, Israelis are forbidden to go more than 100 meters (roughly 325 feet) from home without some permissible purpose. In return, the citizenry has shown a great willingness to make the sacrifices necessary to contain the disease, writes Alex Selsky:

Israelis are showing every day that they are prepared to suffer in the short term for a long-term good. The public trusts its officials to make the right decisions and to balance the possible loss of life with national-security interests. They understand that sometimes ultimate victory comes with pain. [At the same time], Israelis place an inordinately high value on life. We see how the public mourns for people they did not know and never met. Our nation is one big family connected by minute degrees of separation.

Israel is also a country that understands the value of sacrifice. We still vaunt the battle of Tel Ḥai a century ago, and speak with reverence about the actions of Ro’i Klein, killed in 2006 in the battle of Bint Jbeil in Lebanon after he jumped on a grenade to save his fellow IDF soldiers.

Selsky argues that this is evidence that the Jewish state can face other hardships, such as those that might come as it confronts the constant rocket and incendiary-balloon attacks from Gaza, or the threat of war with Hizballah to its north:

More often than not, [Israeli] political decisionmakers [confronted by lethal attacks] decide to bomb a few empty buildings and then seek a truce with the offending party, whether Hamas or Palestine Islamic Jihad. When one asks political and security officials intimately involved why the response is so extremely limited, many argue that the public does not have the stomach for lengthy wars with large casualty figures.

They are mistaken, and now we have some evidence. Israeli decisionmakers should look at [Israelis’ recent display of] fortitude and resilience [when considering how to deal with the country’s] enemies who are starting to see large cracks forming in its deterrence. Our southern residents, who bear the greatest brunt of the Gaza terrorist menace, are usually the ones calling for a most robust approach. They know that if Israel reacts forcefully, perhaps more aggressively than ever before, they are likely to spend many weeks and even months in and out of their bomb shelters and safe rooms.

Surveying news websites and social media on Sunday morning, I immediately found some intelligent and well-informed observers arguing that Iran deliberately warned the U.S. of its pending assault on Israel, and calibrated it so that there would be few casualties and minimal destructiveness, thus hoping to avoid major retaliation. In other words, this massive barrage was a face-saving gesture by the ayatollahs. Others disagreed. Brian Carter and Frederick W. Kagan put the issue to rest:

The Iranian April 13 missile-drone attack on Israel was very likely intended to cause significant damage below the threshold that would trigger a massive Israeli response. The attack was designed to succeed, not to fail. The strike package was modeled on those the Russians have used repeatedly against Ukraine to great effect. The attack caused more limited damage than intended likely because the Iranians underestimated the tremendous advantages Israel has in defending against such strikes compared with Ukraine.

But that isn’t to say that Tehran achieved nothing:

The lessons that Iran will draw from this attack will allow it to build more successful strike packages in the future. The attack probably helped Iran identify the relative strengths and weaknesses of the Israeli air-defense system. Iran will likely also share the lessons it learned in this attack with Russia.

Iran’s ability to penetrate Israeli air defenses with even a small number of large ballistic missiles presents serious security concerns for Israel. The only Iranian missiles that got through hit an Israeli military base, limiting the damage, but a future strike in which several ballistic missiles penetrate Israeli air defenses and hit Tel Aviv or Haifa could cause significant civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure, including ports and energy. . . . Israel and its partners should not emerge from this successful defense with any sense of complacency.