As speculation mounts that President Trump will abandon the 2015 agreement to limit the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program, the agreement’s defenders have begun predicting that Tehran will respond by trying to develop atomic weapons as quickly as possible, leading to disaster. Reuel Marc Gerecht and Ray Takeyh doubt Iran will be so reckless:

Iran is unlikely to rush to a bomb using one of its monitored facilities and the thousands of [unsophisticated] IR-1 centrifuges that such a task would demand. It would take time to reinstall the higher-yield 1,000 IR-2ms currently under the surveillance of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Such stark actions would be detected, likely bringing on U.S. military strikes. The advantage of the most advanced centrifuges, [the IR-6 and IR-8 that Iranian researchers are currently working to develop], is that a small number can rapidly enrich uranium to weapons-grade [quality]. Their cascades can be easily concealed in a warehouse, making them extremely difficult to detect. They are key to a nuclear fait accompli. . . .

[Iran] cannot do much to speed up the development of advanced centrifuges. It routinely takes a country at least a decade to design and construct a new generation. Which is why [the regime and its] nuclear scientists want to preserve the agreement, [which allows them to keep working on the new centrifuges without the burden of sanctions].

The clerical regime may still embark on some nuclear activities as a gesture of defiance to Trump. It may reinstall some of its mothballed centrifuges and continue to perfect the IR2ms. It may stockpile uranium it is currently committed to shipping abroad. It may even enrich uranium to 20 percent. All of these moves are troublesome and will provoke hyperventilating headlines, but they hardly constitute a mad rush to the bomb. . . .

Alone now, Washington has to be willing to play hardball with Tehran by insisting that it does have military options. But our primary task ought to be to squeeze the theocracy relentlessly. Enormous economic pressure can still be brought to bear on Tehran. As the recent nationwide anti-regime demonstrations in Iran revealed, economic frustration and political disgust are widespread in areas the mullahs had assumed were still faithful to theocracy.

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.”