Perhaps the most consistent criticism leveled against the Abraham Accords by the foreign-policy establishment was that they betrayed or undermined Palestinians—despite the fact that over half a century of Arab refusal to have normal diplomatic relations with Israel doesn’t appear to have done much to help them. Indeed, argues Peter Berkowitz, the present moment offers opportunities for Washington to improve the situation of the Palestinians, especially if it is willing to reject the regnant “all-or-nothing approach.”

First, the Biden administration must be persuaded that the Abraham Accords have transformed the dynamics of Middle East politics. Largely staffed with former Democratic-party officials who cling to the old catechism, the new administration has yet to emancipate itself from the disproven conventional wisdom that the only policy toward the Israel-Palestinian conflict worth pursuing is one of near-term comprehensive peace.

Second, the private sector must be encouraged to invest in the West Bank. Instead of spearheading government-led development projects, the United States should help create conditions favorable to private investment. . . . Rather than government officials and national bureaucracies, it should be entrepreneurs, financiers, and philanthropists—from the Gulf states, Israel, the United States, and, of no small importance, the areas under Palestinian Authority jurisdiction—who should be given room to identify and pursue profitable and useful ventures that create opportunities and improve the Palestinians’ condition.

Third, Israel’s broader security perspective must be taken into account in fashioning reasonable concessions and compromises.

To complete the break from the failed past—and improve the long-term prospects for peace for all parties—it will be necessary to implement genuinely incremental measures that, without prejudging the most difficult issues, improve Palestinian lives while preserving Israeli security.

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.