Over the weekend, video circulated online of opponents of judicial reform heckling and shouting at the Israeli legislator Simcha Rothman (in Hebrew) as he walked down Madison Avenue in New York City. Herb Keinon comments on such efforts to bring Israel’s anti-reform protest movement to America’s shores:

That Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s judicial reform plan has, for all intents and purposes, been mothballed, and that talks are ongoing under President Isaac Herzog’s auspices to come to a consensus on changes in the judiciary, are a testament to the effectiveness of the protests. . . . It is not as if no one is listening to the voices being raised in Israel. Why raise them overseas? Why harass and harangue government ministers abroad when it can be done—and is done—with such ease on Israeli soil?

The U.S. public is accustomed to seeing protests against Israel and Israeli officials—be it when the prime minister visits Washington, when AIPAC holds a large gathering, or at college campuses. But these protests are usually organized and carried out by Palestinians or their supporters.

While the Palestinians and their supporters are often protesting against the state itself, the Jews now demonstrating are only protesting against the current government of that state. However, that nuance—a mighty important one—may very well be lost on the average ABC or NBC viewer catching a glimpse of the Jews protesting against government officials at a Salute for Israeli parade or hounding them as they walk down Fifth Avenue.

When Jews protest against Israeli officials abroad, this may be less clear to the uninitiated, and it may be interpreted by those not familiar with the nuances of Israel as opposing the state itself.

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.