As Tehran has gradually escalated its attacks on the U.S. and on commercial shipping—both directly and through its proxies—Washington has responded hesitantly and with minimal force out of fear of provoking escalation and finding itself in a broader conflict. This approach has predictably sent the ayatollahs the message that they can act with impunity, yielding exactly the sort of escalation the White House hoped to avoid. On Sunday, an Iran-backed militia in Syria carried out a drone strike on a U.S. base in Jordan, killing three American soldiers and wounding 34 others. Richard Goldberg writes:

The deadly assault . . . was the 159th Iran-directed attack on American forces in the Middle East since October 17. . . . But these assaults didn’t start on October 17. U.S. Central Command’s chief testified to Congress last year that Iran had directed 78 attacks on American forces in Iraq and Syria from January 2021 to March 2023.

These attacks left two other contractors dead and many more Americans injured. Tehran never once paid a price for these strikes. Nor does it today. To the contrary, Biden has rewarded the ayatollah to the tune of $100 billion—including massive revenue from the non-enforcement of U.S. oil sanctions over three years, a $6 billion ransom payment, and a $10 billion sanctions waiver renewed in November.

Biden’s ideological commitment to appeasing Tehran has incentivized these nonstop attacks. . . . His crippling fear of escalation has guaranteed escalation on all fronts—from the October 7 Hamas massacre to Hizballah missiles raining on northern Israel to Houthi strikes in the Red Sea to Iran’s accelerating production of high-enriched uranium to the attacks on American troops.

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.”