In an in-depth analysis of the Jewish state’s “precarious situation”—written before the COVID-19 epidemic and the country’s 2020 election, and published before a governing coalition was formed—Elliot Jager examines a wide variety of dangers: a powerful and aggressive Iran, a seeming bipartisan U.S. commitment to withdrawal from the Middle East, growing anti-Israel sentiment on the American left, and an increasingly apathetic Diaspora. But he is most concerned about the “corrosive tribalism and the loss of a binding ethos” among Israelis:

In biblical times, this sort of unraveling appeared after King Solomon’s death (ca. 933 BCE), with the breakup of his kingdom into Judah and Israel [a division that continued] until Israel’s fall in 722 BCE and Judah’s in 586 BCE; and later in the lead-up to the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE.

The devastating effects of tribalism have been a motif throughout Jewish history. Still, the ancient Israelite tribes shared a meta-identity. Over the ages, the Jewish people weathered the storms of disunity, fragmentation, and factionalism that buffeted their civilization because they all embraced—whether as sacred history or foundational myth—the Abrahamic covenant that established the contractual relationship between the God of Israel, the people of Israel, and the Land of Israel.

Bizarrely, Israel is a house divided by design. To enter first grade, Israeli parents register their children in one of four distinct educational systems: secular Zionist, national-religious Zionist, non-Zionist ultra-Orthodox, and Arab. For much of Israel’s history, the overwhelming majority of Jewish children attended either secular or national-religious [public] schools. [Now only 53 percent do so.] These numbers portend the demise of the country’s tolerantly liberal Zionist character.

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.