Last week, U.S. media reported that the head of the Mossad came to Washington in July and met with senior American officials about the possibility of establishing formal diplomatic relations between Jerusalem and Riyadh—also the apparent subject of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s recent visit to the kingdom. The response to these developments from some quarters, including pro-Israel ones, is that such an agreement might “throw the Palestinians under the bus,” as one headline put it. Hussain Abdul-Hussain strongly disagrees:

Saudi Arabia has come to recognize a basic truth about the Israel-Palestinian conflict: the Arab world can do little to help Palestinians unless they are willing to help themselves. Palestinian salvation starts from within and requires a clear vision of peace with Israel that Palestinian leaders have thus far spurned.

Last week, Palestinian factions held a conference in Egypt. In their final statement, the factions said that the Palestine Liberation Organization was the sole representative of all Palestinians and that its vision for a two-state solution was their only plan. Such a position guarantees that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and many other armed factions will remain at odds with the Palestinian Authority. Palestinians still have no credible representative or interlocutor who can negotiate peace with Israel, let alone uphold any agreements with the Jewish state.

With all tools of confrontation against Israel exhausted, and with Palestinians’ inability to speak with one voice and agree on one vision, Arab countries are left with two choices: either continue boycotting Israel, at a considerable economic cost and without a clear objective or outcome, or normalize with the Jewish state.

Neither an Arab boycott nor Arab peace with Israel will affect Palestinians. The Arabs have tried boycott and war for 75 years and have achieved little. Perhaps signing [an agreement] and reasoning with Israel over the best way to mitigate Palestinian misery can help.

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.”