As a founding editor of the leftwing Hebrew newspaper Davar and a co-founder of the Histadrut workers’ union, Berl Katznelson (1887–1944) was one of the most influential figures in the history of Labor Zionism. Alex Harris explores Katznelson’s attitudes toward the Jewish tradition, which were very different from those of such fellow Zionist socialists as the theoretician Ber Borochov or the novelist Y.H. Brenner. The great Hebrew writer S.Y. Agnon described him thus:

I will say something akin to a paradox, but it is true. [Katznelson] was not a Torah scholar in the conventional sense. But the love of Torah and clarity of his thoughts and strong mind allowed him to understand. Out of a love of Torah, he would sit for hours and hours and look at books that were seemingly distant from the center of his operations and his face would light up like one who found a treasure.

Harris elaborates:

Rather than viewing the socialist Zionist movement as a complete rupture from the past, Katznelson saw the young men and women of the Yishuv as continuing the arc of Jewish history. Both tradition and revolution were integral parts of the unfolding of history. In [his] article “Destruction and Detachment” (1934) Katznelson wrote: “Would we be capable today of a revival movement if the Jewish people had not protected in their hardened hearts and their holy hinterland the memory of the destruction?”

He also saw the practical value of traditional events in the modern calendar. Katznelson repeatedly praised Shabbat: “We have a need for Shabbat greater than for anything else—we will uphold it as a miracle and build our lives upon it—we will turn our Shabbats and our holidays into cultural bonfires.” Elsewhere he wrote, “the Sabbath for me is a pillar of Hebrew culture and the first socialist achievement of Adam, the first worker in human history.”

On Tuesday, representatives of Hamas met with their counterparts from Fatah—the faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) once led by Yasir Arafat that now governs parts of the West Bank—in Beijing to discuss possible reconciliation. While it is unlikely that these talks will yield any more progress than the many previous rounds, they constitute a significant step in China’s increasing attempts to involve itself in the Middle East on the side of Israel’s enemies.

By contrast, writes Tuvia Gering, Taiwan has been quick and consistent in its condemnations of Hamas and Iran and its expressions of sympathy with Israel:

Support from Taipei goes beyond words. Taiwan’s appointee in Tel Aviv and de-facto ambassador, Abby Lee, has been busy aiding hostage families, adopting the most affected kibbutzim in southern Israel, and volunteering with farmers. Taiwan recently pledged more than half a million dollars to Israel for critical initiatives, including medical and communications supplies for local municipalities. This follows earlier aid from Taiwan to an organization helping Israeli soldiers and families immediately after the October 7 attack.

The reasons why are not hard to fathom:

In many ways, Taiwan sees a reflection of itself in Israel—two vibrant democracies facing threats from hostile neighbors. Both nations wield substantial economic and technological prowess, and both heavily depend on U.S. military exports and diplomacy. Taipei also sees Israel as a “role model” for what Taiwan should aspire to be, citing its unwavering determination and capabilities to defend itself.

On a deeper level, Taiwanese leaders seem to view Israel’s war with Hamas and Iran as an extension of a greater struggle between democracy and autocracy.

Gering urges Israel to reciprocate these expressions of friendship and to take into account that “China has been going above and beyond to demonize the Jewish state in international forums.” Above all, he writes, Jerusalem should “take a firmer stance against China’s support for Hamas and Iran-backed terrorism, exposing the hypocrisy and repression that underpin its vision for a new global order.”