Earlier this month, a mainstream Jewish organization announced that it was planning a “gathering” outside the Qatari embassy in Washington, demanding it pressure Hamas to release hostages. The demonstration was subsequently cancelled due to inclement weather, but it has not been rescheduled and the webpage with details about the gathering has been taken down. One can only hope that the organizers were not dissuaded by the Gulf emirate’s massive influence operation in the West (including over $1 million in donations to New York City public schools), which it has already used to discourage the families of hostages from taking such measures. Given the fact that Qatar funds and hosts Hamas, provides it with diplomatic cover, and propagandizes on its behalf, it certainly has leverage over the organization. It is also likely to be embarrassed by public demonstrations.

Meanwhile, Doha has continued to portray itself as a helpful interlocutor, reportedly proposing another ceasefire deal this week, which appears to have fallen through already. Matthew Karnitschnig raises an even more troubling possibility:

In a series of conversations with Politico in recent weeks, Western intelligence officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue, said that while they have no hard evidence, there are indications the emirate may have known more about the October 7 attack than it has let on.

The primary motivation Qatar would have had to remain silent if it caught wind of the attack, the intelligence officials said, was its interest in derailing talks between Israel and Saudi Arabia, a regional rival, over normalizing relations.

An agreement between the two largest economies in the region could have opened the door to strategic cooperation across a host of areas, including natural gas, Qatar’s lifeblood. Given Israel’s direct access to the Mediterranean and European markets, any energy collaboration with Saudi Arabia would be a game changer.

I’m always cautious about putting too much stock in anonymous reports from unnamed intelligence officials. Yet even if the worst allegations aren’t true, Qatar’s support for Hamas is a fact. And this should make the U.S. reconsider the results of what Karnitschnig calls Doha’s “decades-long effort to make itself an indispensable partner to all sides of the Middle East equation.”

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.”