Over the past year, controversies concerning the collection of user data by Facebook and other websites have raised questions concerning the preservation of privacy in the digital age. The increasing ubiquity of security cameras and the advent of the so-called Internet of Things—systems that allow household appliances, doors, heating systems, and so forth to be controlled by laptop and cell phone—pose even greater privacy concerns. Examining traditional Jewish law, or halakhah, for a concept of the right to privacy, Aviad Hacohen and Gabi Siboni suggest that secular Israeli law could learn from it in dealing with these challenges:

The ban on infringing upon a person’s privacy is specifically mentioned in Jewish law in many contexts. . . . For example, the Mishnah states, “A person must not create an opening [in his own house] opposite an opening [in his neighbor’s], or a window opposite a window. If his opening or window is small, he must not make it larger. If there is one opening, he must not turn it into two openings.” . . . In his commentary on the Talmud, Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir explains that the ban on creating a new opening opposite the opening to his neighbor’s yard (or even a yard shared by both of them) is designed to prevent damage caused by looking into another person’s property; that is, infringement on another person’s privacy.

[The contemporary scholar] Eliyahu Lifshitz explains that the Mishnah shows that damage to privacy caused by opening a window opposite a shared yard is relative and not absolute damage. For this reason, there is no requirement to conceal an existing window, even a large one; it is merely forbidden to create a new window or enlarge an existing one. If the window existed even before the neighbors moved in, they cannot force the window-owner to change his situation; rather, they must take their own measures to prevent the infringement of their privacy. . . .

Jewish law took a more significant step in protecting a person’s privacy regarding personal documents—such as medical records, letters, and, nowadays, material stored on a personal computer—based on a ruling by Rabbi Gershom ben Judah, the greatest Jewish sage in Germany in the 10th century. Among other things, he enacted a ban against any person who reads someone else’s letters without permission, since doing so invades the letter-writer’s privacy. . . .

The general prohibition against infringing upon privacy as well as the specific prohibition against accessing another’s records without that person’s explicit consent are therefore deeply rooted in Jewish law. Accelerated technological development, the weaknesses of cyberspace, and difficulties in security pose new and exciting challenges to Jewish law concerning the application of ancient principles to our times—pouring the fine old wine of Jewish law into the new container of the legal system in Israel, whose values are both Jewish and democratic.

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.”