Peace and Principle
Peace and Principle
China's principled stance on Palestine, Israel vows to press on in Gaza after UN Security Council approves ceasefire proposal, and FM Wang Yi calls on BRICS to promote consensus on peace.
China's principled stance on Palestine exposes US hypocrisy
By Josef Gregory Mahoney (China’s Diplomacy)
China's principled stance on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict exposes the hypocrisy of the United States, which continues to ignore the root causes of the conflict. When Chinese leaders met their counterparts in Beijing recently at the 10th Ministerial Conference of the China-Arab States Cooperation Forum, international media focused primarily on remarks by President Xi Jinping on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
He said, "Since last October, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has escalated drastically, throwing the people into tremendous sufferings."
In addition to pledging more humanitarian aid to Palestinians, Xi said, "War should not continue indefinitely. Justice should not be absent forever. Commitment to the two-State solution should not be wavered at will."
He noted: "China firmly supports the establishment of an independent State of Palestine that enjoys full sovereignty based on the 1967 borders and with East Jerusalem as its capital. It supports Palestine's full membership in the U.N., and supports a more broad-based, authoritative and effective international peace conference."
After the meeting, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told the media that the "strongest call of the meeting was one to firmly support the Palestinian people in restoring their legitimate national rights." The forum's joint statement "puts forward a just voice to promote the speedy resolution of the Gaza conflict and the comprehensive, fair and lasting resolution of the Palestinian issue," Wang said.
Some Western commentators found China's stance problematic. For example, CNN noted: "China has chosen to side with Palestine and the Arab countries. The choice is deliberate as it does suggest a desire to align with Arab countries and the Global South. But China didn't create the crisis. It only capitalized on it." Capitalize? That is a dark and curious accusation. So, let's try to find a more reasonable understanding of all of this.
To begin, after the October 7 attack initiated by Hamas, U.S. President Joe Biden swiftly condemned the group, calling it "a terrorist organization whose stated purpose for being is to kill Jews." He described the attack as "an act of sheer evil" that "slaughtered" more than 1,000 Israeli civilians.
At no point did Biden ask why Hamas attacked or consider if the group had a reasonable strategic objective despite the horrific and inexcusable loss of civilian lives. Instead, he reduced Hamas to "an evil that exists only to kill Jews." This rhetorical sleight of hand, like an emperor signaling assent, provided Israel the moral justification to launch a devastating campaign that has massacred more than 36,000 Palestinians. It also served to wash the hands of his own administration's failures.
For years, instead of promoting peace, Washington has accommodated increasing Israeli aggression that could only lead to war.
In the months leading up to the recent Palestinian-Israeli conflict, experts and diplomats were predicting that war would arrive soon, pointing to three likely triggers. First, in addition to a multi-year blockade of Gaza, Israel was continuing to advance illegal settlements in the occupied territories at speed, killing Palestinians along the way. These acts further eroded the potential for a two-State solution. To accommodate settlements in the West Bank, Israeli forces killed 492 Palestinians in 2023, including 120 children, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. This figure was more than twice as many as in any other year since 2005. An additional 12,769 Palestinians were injured.
Second, Israel was suffering from a crippling political gridlock, a domestic problem that, according to experts, has historically been resolved by going to war and forming a "unity government," thereby externalizing its political dysfunction.
Third, during Donald Trump's presidency, the U.S. abandoned the two-State solution, moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, and imposed heavy sanctions on Iran. President Joe Biden only tepidly re-embraced the two-State solution and did not reverse Trump's decision on the embassy.
Relatedly, Trump authorized the assassination of top Iranian military leader Qasem Soleimani while he was visiting Iraq in 2020. Trump claimed the assassination was justified to prevent a war; others have suggested he was unnerved by Soleimani's alleged purpose in Baghdad, which was to advance negotiations for the normalization of bilateral ties between Iran and Saudi Arabia. This ran afoul of Trump's objective to isolate Iran and instead promote stronger ties between Arab countries and Israel, achieved in part with the Abraham Accords concluded nine months later. Ultimately, Agnes Callamard, the U.N.'s special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings, concluded Soleimani's murder was unjustified and violated international law.
Saudi and Iranian ties reached a breakthrough point with Chinese support in March 2023, and this was precisely when experts were predicting that a war against Gaza would follow. One should ask: Did Hamas strike first because they knew a war was coming and needed hostages for leverage? Did Hamas strike because Israel was already killing hundreds of Palestinians and wounding thousands more? And was a conflict more likely given Israel's unhappiness with improved ties between Riyadh and Tehran? These questions remain unanswered, and few in the West are considering their possible implications despite their tremendous impact on millions of people's well-being.
Such questions are important because they directly address the deeper causes of conflict and the real impediments to peace. These questions have parallels in other conflicts connected to the U.S. For example, the U.S. has repeatedly characterized the conflict in Ukraine as one resulting from unprovoked Russian aggression. However, a more sober analysis suggests that the U.S. intentionally destabilized Russian-Ukrainian relations over many years, using the ensuing instability and insecurity to advance NATO and then fight Russia by proxy in Ukraine. You would be hard-pressed to find any elected official in the West or Kyiv who would acknowledge this. Yet, during my fieldwork in Ukraine last year, it was commonly understood among dozens of people interviewed across the country, from different classes and political factions, including Azov and government soldiers, that this was a "proxy war" between Russia and the U.S. and that Ukraine bore substantial responsibility for allowing itself to be exploited by the U.S. for this purpose. Meanwhile, the U.S. points the finger at Beijing, suggesting contrary to evidence that China has taken Russia's side in the conflict to help Moscow undermine Western democracies.
There is a potential conflict that must be noted here, given what appear to be U.S. efforts to play similar tricks in Asia. The U.S. has sparked instability in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait as it did in Ukraine and Eastern Europe. When China responded by strengthening its defensive position, the White House blamed Beijing for being the cause of rising friction. Just as it advanced NATO in Europe, the U.S. is advancing AUKUS in the Pacific, moving forward with weapons, including nuclear weapons, and troop buildups. The parallels here are too clear to ignore. We can see this in American spin doctors once again describing an axis of evil, this time Beijing, Moscow and Tehran. At the same time, the U.S. government advances continued military aid packages for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan in the name of defending freedom and democracy.
These points must be considered and investigated further to elucidate China's position on Gaza and the promotion of stronger ties with Arab nations and Iran. It's in these contexts that we should understand China's call for a peaceful settlement in Ukraine while simultaneously being sympathetic to Russia's security concerns vis-à-vis NATO expansions and other U.S. provocations. This is why we must push back against demonizing discourses, including facetious characterizations that describe the challenges of the new era as centering on democratic vs. authoritarian states. We must ask: Is killing tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians, including women and children, democratic? Is ignoring UN resolutions democratic? And is pushing the world toward a new cold war or worse democratic? Hopefully, the answers are clear to everyone.
The leaders who met in Beijing during the forum are aware of these points, and others worldwide know them too, whether or not they admit it or prefer to lie. This is why meetings like the forum are so important: it's not about capitalizing on the suffering of others. It's about understanding the real geopolitics driving conflicts, how these fit into a bigger picture, bringing new dangers to the world as a whole, and how people might instead work together to find a different path, one that calls for peace, security, development, mutual respect, and cooperation, to ensure humanity can survive these risks and enjoy a shared future.
NB: Josef Gregory Mahoney is professor of politics and international relations at East China Normal University and senior research fellow with the Institute for the Development of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics at Southeast University and the Hainan CGE Peace Development Foundation.
Israel vows to press on in Gaza after UN Security Council approves ceasefire proposal
By Mariya Knight, Mia Alberti, Richard Roth, Abeer Salman and Hamdi Alkhshali (CNN)
Israel has vowed to persist with its military operation in Gaza, saying it won’t engage in “meaningless” negotiations with Hamas, shortly after the United Nations Security Council overwhelmingly approved a US-backed ceasefire plan intended to bring an end to the eight-month war.
Israel’s representative to the UN, Reut Shapir Ben-Naftaly, emphasized at a UNSC meeting Monday that her country wants to “ensure that Gaza doesn’t pose a threat to Israel in the future.”
The senior diplomat said the war would not end until all hostages were returned and Hamas’ capabilities were “dismantled,” accusing the Palestinian militant group of using “endless negotiations… as a means to stall for time.”
Her comments came after 14 of the 15 UNSC council members voted in favor of Monday’s US-drafted resolution, with only Russia abstaining – the first time the council has endorsed such a plan to end the war. Israel is not a member of the UNSC, and so did not vote.
The comprehensive three-stage peace deal, which sets out conditions intended to lead to the eventual release of all remaining hostages, in return for a permanent ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli forces, was first laid out by US President Joe Biden on May 31.
The landmark vote means the UNSC now joins other major global bodies in backing the plan, increasing international pressure on both Hamas and Israel to end the conflict.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who is on a diplomatic trip to the Middle East, said Tuesday that in a meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the Israeli leader “reaffirmed his commitment” to the current proposal to secure a ceasefire and hostage release, which is still awaiting an answer from Hamas.
Netanyahu has repeatedly and publicly said that his country will press on with the war in Gaza until Hamas is destroyed and the hostages are freed.
But an Israeli statement on Tuesday indicated it was poised to formally sign up to the current ceasefire plan for Gaza, while at the same time maintaining the freedom to keep fighting.
The short communication issued Tuesday, attributed only to an Israeli government official, though widely understood to mean the Prime Minister’s Office, started with an assertion of Israel’s war aims before expressing support for the US-backed proposal currently on the table.
“Israel will not end the war before achieving all its war objectives: destroying Hamas’s military and governing capabilities, freeing all the hostages and ensuring Gaza doesn’t pose a threat to Israel in the future,” it said.
Read more here
FM Wang Yi calls on BRICS to promote consensus on peace, oppose instigation of ‘new Cold War’
By Global Times
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi attended the BRICS Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in the Russian city of Nizhny Novgorod on Monday and all parties highly praised the important role of the BRICS mechanism and the achievements of its expansion. They believe that the inclusion of more countries in BRICS cooperation accelerates the process of world multipolarity, promotes a more just and reasonable international order.
Over the past year, the BRICS cooperation has been marked by brightness, speed and strength, Wang said.
By expanding our membership, we have ushered in a new era of joint self-reliance for the Global South, with the influence and appeal of BRICS continually rising, and we stood at the forefront, achieved success through mutual support, and united as one, accelerating despite headwinds, the top Chinese diplomat noted. ‘’The BRICS brand is shining brighter, and our voice is more powerful.’’ In the face of current global changes, BRICS must maintain a high and far-sighted perspective, Wang said.
At present, certain major powers are reviving Cold War mentality, forming geopolitical small circles, and openly resisting UN Security Council resolutions, thereby undermining the authority of multilateral mechanisms, Wang noted.
The politicization and excessive securitization of economic issues are rampant, and unilateral sanctions and technological barriers are on the rise. In the face of the contest between forces promoting world multipolarity and those maintaining unipolar hegemony, and the clash between economic globalization and "anti-globalization" tendencies, we must follow the trend of history, stand on the side of fairness and justice, and make the right choices, he said.
Looking to the future, the “Big BRICS" must undertake great responsibilities and achieve significant accomplishments. We should fully leverage the strategic significance and political impact of the "Big BRICS," transforming BRICS into a new type of multilateral cooperation mechanism that is based on emerging markets and developing countries, globally oriented, and open and inclusive, Wang said.
The top Chinese diplomat called on continuing to uphold the banner of multilateralism, leading in maintaining the international system centered on the UN, and firmly resisting actions that undermine international order and violate international rules.
The BRICS should also promote an equitable and orderly world multipolarity and inclusive economic globalization, enhancing coordination and cooperation while highlighting the Global South moment in significant international agendas and placing development at the center.
Wang also called on promote capacity building in digital economy and artificial intelligence (AI) for developing countries, ensuring equal participation and equal benefits.
On security issue, Wang stressed that no matter how complex the situation, dialogue and consultation cannot be abandoned. No matter how sharp the conflict, political resolution must be pursued.
On the Palestine-Israel conflict, we must firmly promote an immediate, comprehensive, and sustainable ceasefire in Gaza, alleviate the humanitarian crisis, and prevent the conflict from spilling over, Wang noted. He also called on supporting Palestine's membership as a full-fledged UN member state and restart the "two-state solution" to achieve lasting peace in the Middle East.
Meanwhile, as the Ukraine crisis continues, China supports the timely convening of peace talks that are accepted by both Russia and Ukraine, with equal participation from all parties and fair discussion of all peace proposals, Wang noted.
The BRICS should adhere to independence and objectivity, promote the international community's consensus on peace, and oppose the instigation of a "new Cold War" under any pretext, he said.
The top Chinese diplomat also suggested to fully leverage the resources and market advantages of the “Big BRICS,” strengthen the supporting role of financial and trade cooperation, ensure energy and food security cooperation, drive innovation cooperation, and act as a bridge for cultural exchanges.
China has established the "China-BRICS AI Development and Cooperation Center" to promote cooperation in industry alignment and capacity building, welcoming active participation from all countries, Wang noted.
All parties involved in the meeting called for adherence to multilateralism, opposition to unilateralism and protectionism, and the promotion of reforms in the international financial structure, according to a readout released by China’s Foreign Ministry on Monday night.
They also emphasized the need to strengthen and improve global governance, enhancing the voice and representation of developing countries. All parties stressed the importance of resolving disputes peacefully through dialogue and consultation and supported all efforts conducive to the peaceful resolution of crises.
The meeting also issued a joint statement of the BRICS Foreign Ministers' Meeting, according to the readout.