A recent collection of essays on the so-called BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanctions) movement explores the twisted ideologies that have led to increased calls from university faculties to isolate Israel. The essays expose the intellectual vacuity of the movement, how easily it slips into overt anti-Semitism, and how hating Israel “has become arguably the single most potent marker of being of the left today.” Andrei Markovits writes:

[T]he New Left . . . shifted the axes of theory and practice from the Old Left’s proletariat as the subject of history and prime agent of salvation to third-world peoples. This also entailed a much more comprehensive reorientation of progressive politics from extolling the Enlightenment, as virtually all major agents of the Old Left did with gusto, to its total dismissal. Indeed, for the New Left, the Enlightenment—and its main global representative, “the West”—mutated into the all-powerful oppressor which had to be confronted on all fronts by new agents of progress and revolution, none more potent than Third World liberation movements of whatever ideological bent. Few, if any, became more beloved for the new progressives than the Palestinians, victims of the Jews, who, a-priori suspect as paragons of the Enlightenment, became doubly evil by virtue of attaining power in a “settler” state and thus becoming Exhibit A of a Western-implemented (neo-)colonialism at the behest of the source of all evil—the Great Satan, as it were—called the United States of America.

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.