A few months ago, discussions began between Tehran and the other parties to the 2015 nuclear agreement about how the deal could be restored, but these soon broke off. The Islamic Republic has since stalled, making use of various pretexts—until quite recently, when it told the U.S. it was ready to resume the talks, which are expected to begin again near the end of this month. Yaakov Amidror assesses the mullahs’ motivations:

The Iranian tactic of delaying the return to talks was possibly designed to make the Americans so enthusiastic about the mere resumption of negotiations that they would agree to the Iranian demand and ease the sanctions for the duration of the talks. The [reason] why Iran is returning to the talks is thus straightforward: the present leadership in Tehran has a clear interest in returning to the 2015 agreement because it is a good agreement for the Iranians, who seek to develop nuclear weapons. The Iranians understood that the nuclear deal was good for them, and now even more so, in light of the rapid progress in their enrichment program.

Moreover, they delayed the resumption of talks because they realized that a military option did not exist, neither in the current administration nor the previous one. The absence of a military option was the main weakness the Iranians sensed when the previous U.S. administration withdrew from the nuclear deal. It was a significant mistake to withdraw from the deal without charting a viable military option and demonstrating the determination to use it if necessary.

The Iranian perception that there is no military option on the table will also be their basic assumption in future negotiations. . . . The Iranians also observed that after launching drone attacks against an American base in al-Tanf in eastern Syria last month, the United States failed to respond in any serious manner. . . . This is not how a superpower should behave, but the Iranians assumed that the attack would not harm them.

This lack of an American response signaled that the U.S. wants to return to negotiations at almost any cost. But, unfortunately, it also might lead Iran to conclude that it can continue its aggressive behavior in the Middle East as long as there are prospects for further talks.

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.