Hamas’s large-scale attack might be a surprise, but a ‘new’ conflict in the ‘powder keg’ is not surprising at all.
China’s political elites fully understand the challenges in the Middle East and always keep a justified course. Its reaction is quite predictable. Just like before, China focused on negotiating to realize a ceasefire and minimizing the casualties of civilians.
But from Washington to Riyadh, many people are wondering what China really wants and when China would let itself be involved deeper.
China’s Ultimate Vision
Since the ‘pivot to Asia’ was proposed by the Obama administration, it is arguable that the best move for China is to stir the situation in the Middle East, or at least not to help ease the tensions there to stall the US.
However, China chose the opposite direction and even facilitated the reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Let’s imagine an ‘ideal’ model of the Middle East for China. This region should be a key element of One Belt One Road with growing markets, partners in manufacturing, and transport hubs to Europe and Africa. In that case, which unfortunately could not come true shortly, peace and stabilization were essential prerequisites.
Well, preventing the US from transferring the strategic assets to the Pacific does look tempting. On the other hand, the petty trick is not decisive at all.
In the military field, one has to prepare for the worst scenario. China’s answer is to develop the J-20 stealth fighters, the large carriers, the 055 large destroyers, the hypersonic missiles, and the ballistic anti-ship missiles. It is also upgrading and expanding its nuclear arsenal. Having the ability to defeat the US in an all-out unification war is the only way to get the initiative.
But China will not keep larger forces trying to win a war in the regions far away from the mainland. Throughout history, too many powers began declining since they overreached themselves. China wants to avoid the tragedy and hopes that the regional powers are capable of keeping balance and peace.
How is the Israel-Palestine conflict relative to all of this then?
Who is the ‘Trouble Maker’?
In this ‘ideal’ model, Israel could be a good partner with a moderate market. It is also one of the leaders in some technological areas and provides opportunities to cooperate with. Nonetheless, it was always moving away from China’s vision. It was not performing as a regional power that helped stabilize.
Indeed, Israel was getting slightly closer to Saudi Arabia right before this conflict. On the face of it, Hamas seems to be the ‘trouble-maker’ this time to break down the reconciliation course between Saudi Arab and Israel.
But most of the impartial observers would not forget that Israel never stopped encroaching on Palestinian territory, implementing racial segregation policies, or provoking the Muslims. Not to mention the terrible casualties of the Palestinian people for years.
The immoral apartheid wall could be arguably ‘effective’ in some way. But what Israel has done is only to add fuel to the flames. As long as the Palestinian people were angry enough to devote themselves to resisting, the wall would be breached sooner or later.
Israel’s Confusing Vision
Israel has displayed a sharp contrast compared with China’s vision even before this conflict.
There were deep ideological divisions among the Jews, some of whom even objected to Zionism due to religious reasons. Hence, I would only put the ruling right-wing in concern in the following brief discussion.
It is understandable that Israel also wants to take the initiative militarily and prepare for the worst war. Israel has the right to arm itself to teeth. This is truly the foremost guarantee for the security of the state. But unlike most other countries, Israelis did not show caution all the time. They even shot Palestinian teenagers who merely threw stones.
The second one is to establish and stabilize diplomatic relations with some Arab countries. It worked, too. Egypt has more than 1000 Abrams tanks now but few people believed that it would have a war with Israel.
But it should be noted that diplomatic relations which always only involve political elites don’t reflect the whole picture. Israel was generating hatred in the region for years. In the long-term, the oppressing and encroaching don’t help keep it safe. No one knows when the accumulative anger would be ignited and whether the Arabian political elites would adhere to public opinion or even make use of it.
Israel itself is just sitting on the bucket of gunpowder. It could not expel all the Palestinian people. Rather, it needs them as part of the workforce. Then why not treat them fairly?
And the encroaching increased the friction between people so that it was conceptually contradicting the separation policies. The far-right radicals were even troublesome to Likud.
What one can see is all the incoherence in Israeli policies or a mixture of policies that tries to please the voters of different political spectra.
The Dim Hope
China’s approach is to stand close to the Arab countries advocating for the two-state solution. It only supported the UN resolution that condemned the violence against civilians on both sides. It would not define Hamas as a terrorist group as Israel asked for many times. In 2006, Hamas won the election which reflected the will of the Palestinian people to resist the illegal occupation. Naming it terrorism and denying its legal right to rule did not bring peace.
Since the conflict began, Israel might have a new short-term vision to ‘cleanse’ the Gaza Strip and destroy Hamas. It could be done eventually with a humanitarian disaster, but Hamas doesn’t come from a vacuum. As long as Israel keeps the oppression, a new group would definitely emerge. Israel should know it well. After all, it has a complex history with Fatah and Hamas.
Frankly speaking, the two-state solution only fits the long-term ‘ideal’ vision of China. There is dim hope to fulfill it in the near future. But it is worth referring again and again to show the way to peace.
With a formidable advanced army, Israelis still live in unease. The military preparation has consumed too many resources that could be otherwise used in social welfare, research programs, or other areas that directly benefit the civilian.
Going back to the ‘Land for Peace’ solution and putting an end to provoking policies would be a better alternative for Israel. Right now, Israel is just like Sisyphus who rolled the stone onto the mountain repeatedly. It won a war and then was attacked again. From this perspective, China’s approach is also helping Israel to get rid of the tragic circle.
Although China would like to negotiate, it could not oblige Israel to oblige. Even though some Israeli political elites agreed to move in that direction, they had to settle the ‘settlers’ issue first and prevent themselves from being assassinated like Yitzhak Rabin.
A truly ‘good war’ for Israel might be a domestic political conflict that shifts the state onto the right track.
