If the Iran-backed Yemeni militia isn’t interested in “human rights,” what does it seek by launching missiles at civilian vessels? Ari Heistein and Jason Brodsky explain:

Economic misery is not an aberration but a characteristic of the Houthi regime. [The terrorist organization’s] aim is not necessarily to make life worse for Yemenis but rather . . . to redirect Yemeni frustrations outward. The group needs to find a new “culprit” while Saudi bombing, the Houthis’ previous explanation for Yemen’s poverty, has been paused due to a multi-year ceasefire. A U.S.-led alliance is the perfect candidate for Houthi villainization, as it comports with the Houthis’ anti-Western ideology.

[In addition], the regime in Sanaa seeks to demonstrate its value to its sponsors in Tehran. They stand to benefit from proving their worth. For the Houthis, establishing that they are both competent and can deliver an excellent return on investment for Iran may translate into additional funding.

[Lastly], by targeting U.S. and Israeli interests in ways that are difficult to respond to, the Houthis are aiming to erode U.S. and Israeli prestige in the region. The Houthi worldview is summed up by the group’s signature “scream” or slogan, “God is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse upon the Jews, Victory to Islam.”

These considerations, argue Heistein and Brodsky, should inform America’s response:

[T]he U.S.-led anti-Houthi coalition should make efforts to surprise Sanaa and its patron in Tehran. That was the opposite of what happened when the Houthis received advanced warning before coalition strikes after an interminably long period of Western deliberation on taking action. The coalition should also seek to create uncomfortable dilemmas for the group and its sponsors while demonstrating to regional allies that they are better off standing up to the Houthis with U.S. backing than cowering to the radical Houthi regime.

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.”