When the Trump administration withdrew from its 2015 agreement with Tehran, it did not immediately resume the entire battery of sanctions that the agreement had suspended. Instead, it issued a number of specific, temporary waivers. This week the State Department renewed for another 60 days one of these waivers, which blocks sanctions on the European, Russian, and Chinese corporations that operate the Islamic Republic’s supposedly civilian nuclear facilities. Jonathan Tobin criticizes this decision, apparently taken at the behest of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin:

Mnuchin is apparently more interested in good relations with the international community than in using American economic power to roll back the alarming gains Iran has made in the Middle East—gains made as a result of Barack Obama’s misguided attempt to bring about a rapprochement with Tehran.

This is a huge mistake. Richard Goldberg, [an expert on Iran sanctions], has argued that we could retain the waiver if the Europeans, Russians, and Chinese promised to “snap back” sanctions in the event that Iran violated the deal. Indeed, under the pact, these countries have pledged to hold Iran accountable. But none of them have any intention of doing so. What they want is to preserve the nuclear deal at all costs; they want to roll back President Trump’s sanctions policy, which has made it harder for the Iranians to continue funding terror.

The timing for this decision is also particularly tragic because it comes just after a public acknowledgement that Robert Levinson, a retired American intelligence operative kidnapped by Iran in 2007, died while in Iranian custody. Levinson’s disappearance is still officially unsolved—Iran has not produced his body. But Levinson’s family has recently said that the Trump administration told them that newly discovered intelligence—reportedly including intercepted Iranian communications—show that Levinson died while in Iranian hands sometime in the past several years.

Sadly, along with other U.S. concessions made during the Iran-deal negotiations, then-President Obama and then-Secretary of State John Kerry decided they would not hold up the agreement by insisting that Iran free Levinson or produce his body. The recent history of American dealings with Iran has been dominated by that kind of callous expediency. . . . Strengthening Iran by once again loosening sanctions—as Mnuchin apparently wants—out of misplaced sympathy or a desire to accommodate the Europeans or Russians won’t help anyone but the [ayatollahs].

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.