The Jerusalem Post praises Israeli security forces for “ferretting out an Islamic State cell training for jihad in the Galilee,” and warns that “Israel’s Arab sector is facing a threat from within of which too few of us are aware.”  The editor believes that “The phenomenon of local Arabs volunteering to fight alongside the jihadist forces may be small in terms of overall population proportions, but the fact that it at all exists and the context in which it is steadily sprouting is nothing we can afford to scoff at,” and asserts: “The very fact that Islamic State and allied radical Islamist outfits entice disciples within our borders should ring all our alarm bells.”

Haaretz criticizes the censorship imposed on information regarding IDF actions, especially with regard to the recent alleged Israeli attack on senior Hezbollah and Iranian military commanders, and complains: “As details of the incident become clearer, it’s as if the censorship were designed to bolster Likud’s election campaign and hide the truth about the incident.” The editor is concerned that political worries pushed PM Netanyahu and MOD Ya’alon “into a dangerous adventure that has brought Israel to the brink of a confrontation with Hezbollah and Iran,” and adds: “Netanyahu and Ya’alon’s recklessness and avoiding of responsibility under cover of censorship only strengthens the view that they are not fit for their jobs.” The editor concludes: “The military’s willingness to toe the line set by its political superiors and the opposition’s hesitancy to ‘unpatriotically’ criticize a showcase operation in Syria is no less worrisome.”

Yediot Aharonot remarks on the abundance of intelligence constantly received by Israel's leaders, and points out that their “great challenge is to consider the entire state of affairs and restrain themselves.” The author doesn’t necessarily believe that this week's strike in the Golan was unnecessary, but, aware of the high number of casualties in retaliation attacks caused by other assassinations of terrorist leaders in the past, states: “If Israel is indeed responsible for the operation, all that is left for it to do is to apologize and pray. All the rest is out of our hands.”

Yisrael Hayom comments on the thawing of Israeli-Japanese bilateral relations, as marked by this week’s visit to Israel by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, and notes that while the Japanese do not stray far from neutrality, “The complex geopolitical conditions in the Middle East pushed the Asian country that values stability and balance into Israel's warm embrace.”  The author regrets that the Japanese prime minister’s visit did not generate much of a buzz in the media despite its significance, and notes: “The Japanese visit was worthy of a greater, more significant audience, as it will likely have a long-term effect in Israel in many strategic fields that are important to our future.”

Globes voices concern that profits of Teva, the Israeli pharmaceutical giant, may decline sharply after the expiry of its patent for Copaxone, a drug responsible for an estimated half of the company's profits. In the aftermath of a recent US Supreme Court ruling, the author notes that it now seems that Teva will have no generic competition for Copaxone before September 2015, when the patent on the drug is due to expire. The author says that despite the fact that the company “does not have any products in its pipeline that can fill the vacuum that Copaxone will leave in the company's financial results,” she remains optimistic regarding future profits, both because of the progress the company has made in cutting costs and because of the distinct possibility that "no generic product will obtain FDA approval after the patent expires.”