While Iran may be Hamas’s main provider of weapons, training, and strategic cooperation, Qatar gives it funds, a base of operations, and diplomatic cover. But yesterday, Tsachi Hanegbi—the Israeli national-security advisor and a Likud-party veteran—took to social media to praise Qatar as an “essential . . . stakeholder in the facilitation of humanitarian solutions,” a reference, at least in part, to Doha’s role in the release of four of Hamas’s hostages, and its attempts to negotiate the freeing of others. Hanegbi was quickly lambasted by the former prime minister Naftali Bennett. Benny Avni explains why:

The wealthy gas-producing Gulf country has long played a dual game, financing Hamas in Gaza and hosting the terrorist group’s top leaders, while claiming a peacemaker role. Qatar’s arsonist-and-fireman play is now culminating as it becomes key negotiator over the release of more than 220 Israeli hostages Hamas holds in Gaza.

For years, some $30 million in monthly cash transfers from Qatar mostly covered Hamas officials’ salaries. Each time it ran out of cash, Hamas would fire at Israel. The Qatari envoy to Gaza, Mohammed al-Emadi, would then drive to the Strip with suitcases filled with hundred-dollar bills. The bribes bought Israel calm—until the next rocket rounds.

That delicate dance ended with the horrific October 7 attack, which destroyed the Israeli illusion that Hamas’s genocidal goals, as explicitly expressed in its founding charter, could be moderated by Qatari development funds.

By only issuing . . . mild criticism of Qatar, Washington, [for its part], seems to be encouraging its diplomacy with regard to Hamas’s hostages. Yet, by releasing a small number of hostages at a time, Hamas is attempting to put a humanitarian gloss on its atrocities. More strategically, Qatar’s diplomacy is helping Hamas delay Israel’s long-promised Gaza invasion.

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.”