When Israel conducts war, it does not allow interference from the United Nations or UN.

Its belief that groups of rich Arab nations dominate the UN did not help reverse its extreme skepticism of the multilateral organization.

Yet Israel remains conscious of public perception.

The California-based think tank Rand Corp. believes modern militaries must also confront lawfare.

Operation Protective Edge showed how modern democratic militaries must increasingly confront lawfare using the law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve an objective when combating irregular forces, especially in urban terrain.

Protective Edge was otherwise known as the 2014 Gaza War, which was launched in response to unceasing missile, rocket, and mortar fire on civilian centers in Israel.

Like its ongoing operations, the Israel Defense Forces, or IDF, targeted strategic Hamas facilities, tunnels, weapons and leadership.

Protective Edge featured several controversial battles. Those engagements became the subject of intense legal scrutiny and a UN-led inquiry, which called into question the IDF's use of weapons with wide-area effects in densely populated areas and other tactics.

Precision firepower, mainly through air strikes, has limitations. The first lesson concerns its limits, particularly in dense urban terrain.

Ultimately, airpower alone failed to deliver the results the Israel Defense Forces needed during Operation Protective Edge.

Despite an intense bombardment during the first week of the conflict, airpower could not achieve the tactical results the IDF needed, nor could airpower achieve the broader strategic aim of deterring Hamas and restoring a measure of peace to the region.

Tunnel warfare needs to continue to develop. Even after the conclusion of Protective Edge, the IDF faced real technological challenges with detecting, fighting in, and ultimately destroying tunnels. While the IDF improved in tunnel warfare during the campaign, it remained an area of concern.