In a March 8 speech, Hizballah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah called on his followers to give more generously to the organization, citing increasing U.S. economic pressure on Iran—Hizballah’s principal patron—as one reason it needs donor support more than ever. Many have taken this and similar statements as evidence that the terrorist group is in dire financial straits. But Tony Badran argues that such an interpretation takes Nasrallah’s words out of context and ignores the realities on the ground:

At the heart of Nasrallah’s much-cited speech was the domestic situation in Lebanon, which is central to Hizballah’s operations and finances. The Lebanese economy is moribund, and international donors are demanding structural reforms from the government in Beirut. . . . Nasrallah’s messaging was not aimed at raising insignificant amounts of small change from the Shiite community to fund Hizballah’s operations. Rather, he was addressing [Lebanese] Shiites as their communal representative in the political system at a moment of economic hardship and uncertainty in Lebanon. . . . [H]is speeches and anecdotes are purposeful rhetoric intended to serve a specific function: promoting total identification between Hizballah and the Shiite community. . . .

Over the past eight years, Hizballah has been involved in military campaigns in four countries, most notably in Syria. In addition, Hizballah has been using Lebanon as an operational headquarters to host, train, and treat militia fighters from the region. To sustain the logistical needs alone of these campaigns, Hizballah’s expenditures had to grow exponentially. While its fighters are still very much actively deployed, in Syria especially, the conditions in all four theaters today have lessened in intensity since the peak of the conflicts, which has allowed Hizballah to decrease or reallocate spendings. . . .

Hizballah is not bankrupt. But have Iranian funds to the group been affected by sanctions on Tehran? The answer is most likely “yes,” but . . . the more critical question is: has Hizballah’s ability to continue to run its operations, both military and nonmilitary, been substantially curtailed at this point in the maximum-pressure campaign? There is no convincing evidence to suggest that anything like that is happening.

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.