>> Maybe JWST will allow that.
Sadly not, although it will be a great improvement over Hubble. To get a proper look even at the Centauri system, we'll need a space based interferometer with a synthetic aperture in the tens of km at least, and preferably a couple of hundred (although that's getting more into tracking weather on those planets, and extending our "vision" out to a few light years by that stage). As remarkable as the JWST is, it still falls way, WAY short of anything that might properly be described as "good". If you put it on a 0 - 10 scale, with 0 being Galileio finally being able to make observations not available to the Mk1 eyeball, and 10 being a Type II Kardashev civ being able to observe all objects in the Milky Way in all wavelengths and gravitational waves in more-or-less real time, the JWST is maybe a 1. Maybe.
On the flip side, look at how much we've learned already, even without the benefit of good equipment, and most observations having to have been made through the murky gunk of Earths atmosphere. Once we have some actually good observational data to work with,. who knows what we'll find?
