Oh, please, no....

Militarism does not bring security. Militarism does not bring security. Not even if your superiority seems overwhelming. Militarism does not bring security.

From Haaretz (Israel) for Sunday:

Hezbollah announced Sunday that it had sent an unmanned reconnaissance drone on sorties over northern Israel earlier in the day, saying that the plane - known as the Mirsad-1 - flew as far as Nahariya[, about 9 km, more than 5 miles, inside Israel,] before returning safely to its base in southern Lebanon.

The Israel Defense Forces confirmed Sunday evening that a drone did indeed enter Israeli airspace, and flew over the northern city of Nahariya. The IDF said that the drone crashed into the sea when it returned to Lebanon. Reports from Lebanese fishermen of an object slamming into the sea apparently confirms the IDF's report.

"The new qualitative achievement comes as part of the natural response to Israel's violation of Lebanese air space," the militant organization said in a report on its television channel, Al-Manar. ...

Hezbollah also warned that it would continue to dispatch drones.

"Starting today, we will send our planes as we please," the group said. ...

Labor MK Eitan Cabel demanded that the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee hold an urgent meeting to examine how such a simple device could have successfully entered Israeli airspace, undetected by a sophisticated radar system that costs millions of dollars.

The San Francisco Chronicle adds the detail that the flight lasted about 20 minutes and the Jerusalem Post, based on the Israeli military's identification of the craft as of Iranian manufacture, describes it as "a small remote-controlled drone with one engine and a small camera."

As for the radar systems, MK Cabel is missing the point. It is precisely the simplicity of the device that is its advantage. The small, the simple, the unsophisticated, is often the hardest to detect and the hi-tech the easiest to overcome because of the frailty of its complexities. (I recall attempts by the US to use high-tech sensors in Indochina to detect motion along the Ho Chi Minh trail. One method was a "sniffer" that detected increased levels of ammonia, which indicated human presence. Soldiers simply hung buckets of urine in the trees, overwhelming the sensors and rendering them useless.)

Hezbollah might be just trying to thumb its collective nose at Israel, particularly since it made a point of calling it a response to Israeli violations of Lebanese airspace. It could also be trying to demonstrate its continued relevance by taking a provocative but ultimately non-threatening action in response to Israeli overflights, something that would cause Israel distress without provoking a direct military response, as a commentary in the Daily Star (Lebanon) suggests.

But note that the drone went 5 miles into Israel and at least almost 5 miles back (depending on whose version you accept). What if there was no intention of having it return? What if everything in Israel within at least 10 miles of the border - which would reach almost to Acre - was within range of drones, drones which theoretically could be fitted with explosives and fired quickly and easily from anywhere, including the back of a truck? What if they become available not only to Hezbollah? A string of what ifs, I know - but well within the bounds of reason.

So at what point do the risks of the status quo exceed the risks of peace? There is no clear answer to that question but I do say that for some time what has been clear is on which side of that divide Israel sits.

Footnote: Something perhaps revealing of varying political stands is the translation offered of the Arabic word "mirsad."

The SF Chronicle says it means "observation post."

The Daily Star says it means "observer."

The Jerusalem Post says it means "ambush."