So, can we call it an intifada yet?

When it comes to nouns for vehicular assaults, especially the nationalistically motivated kind, the English language is unsurprisingly lacking. Not so in Hebrew though, where a two-word phrase consisting of “pigua,” meaning terror attack, and “drisa,” the act of running a person over with a vehicle, has become the standard appellation for the newest kind of terror seemingly coursing through Jerusalem and its environs.

Both words (along with “terror,” which has seeped into Hebrew) feature prominently in Thursday’s newspapers, a day after one person was killed and over a dozen more injured in two separate incidents of Palestinians ramming their cars into pedestrians.

All three major dailies give the story wide play, but each tackles it differently. Haaretz sticks to a “just the facts, ma’am” black-and-white reporting on what happened and the reactions; Israel Hayom has more breathless takes on the day’s events, including in-depth coverage of the “heroism of the Border Police” and a flurry of commentators calling for a harsh response; and Yedioth Ahronoth, while also reporting the news, lets its analysts tackle the age-old question of “So can we call it an intifada yet?”

The paper’s Sima Kadmon answers that query with a resounding “yes,” writing that’s it not even a question anymore.

“There’s an intifada and it’s not so quiet, as it was termed at the start. It’s quiet like an avalanche that makes its way from the top of the mountain. The picture we are seeing from Jerusalem and the area doesn’t look like rising and falling violence, as ministers put it this week,” she writes.

Yoav Limor in Israel Hayom says the question of what to call the violence is less important than what to do about it.

“The dramatic rise in level of terror demands first of all a security answer. More forces, more intel, more punishment. Whoever carries out an attack – certainly if they are an Israeli citizen – needs to know that there’s a price,” he writes. ”A process like this will have a double effect: it will strengthen the dilemma on the other side [read Arabs] and will lower the number of attacks, and in the future it will raise the sense of security for the Jewish residents of Jerusalem.”

They can start with Shuafat.

Haaretz notes that the Shuafat refugee camp, where the driver in the first attack came from, and which broke out into violent riots after the incident and his killing, has become a terrorist breeding ground, according to security sources. The officials say the area, technically within Jerusalem but practically out of the city (and separate from the more middle-class Shuafat neighborhood), has become a sort of no-go zone Mogadishu for Israeli security forces.

“The refugee camp has become a fertile ground for terrorists because of its proximity to the West Bank, even though it is regarded as a neighborhood in Jerusalem, they note,” the paper reports. “The Israel Defense Forces do not operate there because it is within the Jerusalem city limits, although practically speaking the security barrier running through the area has cut it off from the city. Conversely, because it is beyond the fence, the police rarely enter.”

The paper’s Amos Harel notices that last year also saw a spike in violence in Jerusalem around the same time, though there’s a stark and worrying difference now.

“Last year’s incidents seemed like a series of ‘lone wolf’ attacks, terrorists acting on their own, mostly with no affiliation to an organization and no orderly chain of command behind them. In recent months, however, the attacks carried out by individuals are accompanied by the protest of many,” he writes. “A considerable number of Palestinian protesters clash weekly with the police on various sites in East Jerusalem. The religious factor is extremely significant this time around, mainly because of the Palestinian fear that Israel is attempting to unilaterally change the status quo on the Temple Mount, which Muslims worship as the Noble Sanctuary.”

Ties go up, ties go down

There’s also another factor at play this time around, and that’s growing anger in Amman over the fate of Jerusalem’s holiest sites. Yedioth reports that the Hashemite Kingdom is considering revoking its peace treaty with Israel, less than two weeks after celebrating the pact’s 20th anniversary. The paper reports that Amman recalled its ambassador, for only the second time in those 20 years, and there are calls by the country’s lawmakers to kick out the Israeli ambassador and cut ties completely.

“The Jordanian government is caught between a hysterical public and the need for security cooperation with Israel,” an Israeli government official tells the paper. “The Jordanian public is led by extremists and the government doesn’t have the courage to stand up to them and tell them the truth.”

While ties with Jordan may be torpedoed by the public, in Israel Hayom Boaz Bismuth speculates that the Republicans’ big win in Congress Tuesday will mean US President Barack Obama will be forced to repair relations with Jerusalem.

“The new Congress does not love the administration’s moves with Iran. Many of those elected are those who don’t buy the Iranian smile and their promise to stop their military nuclear program. … The American public also doesn’t like the president’s foreign policy against Iran,” he writes. “To those who think Obama will revive the talks between Israel and the Palestinians, you need to remember the preferred status the Israeli prime minister gets from Congress, and even more so from the newly elected one. It’s safe to assume Obama will have to repair ties with [Benjamin] Netanyahu first. Trips by John Kerry to the Mideast will not be an added luxury for this administration.”