Although a ceasefire between Israel and Gaza’s terrorist rulers went into effect just over a month ago, there has not been total quiet. Last week, Gazan terrorists launched incendiary devices into southern Israel using balloons—sometimes disguised as children’s toys—and the IDF responded with airstrikes. The balloons have stopped for the past few days, but Dan Schueftan is not hopeful about the situation:

Unless Jerusalem is provoked, it does not act against the terrorist organization, allowing Hamas to use periods of calm to regain strength that would be used against Israel in concert with Iran and Hizballah once hostilities break again. If Hamas were to continue with its most recent provocations, Jerusalem would have no choice but to act, and potentially to deny the organization the concessions it seeks.

Israel has in the past entered into . . . agreements in order to get back MIAs or other Israelis who had been captured by Hamas. This time, however, what Hamas has to offer are bodies of two fallen soldiers and two civilians who crossed the border into the strip. Even if Hamas were to receive only a fraction of its demands, Israel would get back bodies at the price of many Israelis whose names we will only get to know after they are killed.

If no one holds Hamas responsible for waging a constant war, and any military damage is easily repaired with aid from the U.S. and Israel, why would it stop killing Jews?

Many in Israel prefer not to look at the broader context. They tell themselves that the Palestinian people have turned to violence out of despair brought about by ignorance or economic hardship. In reality, . . . it is hope, rather than desperation, that drives the Palestinian people: the hope that their violent instincts could be gratified, that they could punish the Jews for building prosperous lives and finally put an end to their existence in the Middle East.

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.