China’s foreign minister said Saturday that Israel has gone too far in responding to last week’s invasion by Hamas, China’s official news agency reported.
Speaking to Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Israel’s actions have extended beyond self-defense.
According to Xinhua, China has an interest in helping resolve the conflict and the underlying issues involving the Palestinian population.
It’s quite an obvious geopolitical win for them. It’s not hard to notice that the “western” reactions to the Russian occupation of Ukraine is pretty inconsistent with the support of the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. Obviously support for Ukraine is the right thing to do, but again, inconsistent policy is easy to critique.
This is one of those things that is so set in people’s minds, I’d love to know what you actually imagine happening when you say it - like what you’re picturing.
I’ve been giving friends pop quizes about Xinjiang when they bring it up, so far not found a single person who knows anything about any single part of it.
It’s interesting because so many people claim to be deeply concerned about it but no one ever seems to have any real desire to learn about it, I’ve seen a million infographics this week about Palestines population and the history and everything but no one ever posts facts about the situation in China even though it’s mentioned endlessly in glib comments.
At a guess, it may be because it’s not as easily accessible by the western media. If they can’t report on it directly, they won’t give it full attention apart from the occasional opinion piece or blog and that won’t make a headline or sell papers.
Here’s an idea? Let the Chinese government administer Gaza! They have experience reeducting Muslims right? Then all Gazaouis muslims will become Jewish, Christian, atheist, you name it! Possibilities are endless.
Thank you for supporting the idea and sorting out the details! You are right, gazaoui buddhists gonna have it rough. Also sorry for making assumptions without insulting you, I’m new around here
Last I checked Uyghurs are still practicing Sunnis and Tibetans are still practicing Buddhists. In fact, Uyghurs still speak Uyghur and Tibetans still speak Tibetan!
I’m not going to ask how many Cherokee speak Tsalagi or how many Cherokee practice Christianity because it’ll make me sad.
Yeah, Israel should only have gone as far as putting Palestinians into concentration/re-education camps with a healthy side-dose of black market organ trading and forcing Palestinian families to live with an Israeli supervisor, if CCP’s example is to be followed.
At least China is making it clear where it is on the lines being drawn in the global geopolitics. What I don’t get is social media like YouTube still sucking up to them and censoring things like 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. It’s very easy to support Palestine against Israel, but what Palestinians really need is support that isn’t built up on bad faith (a.k.a. the people also supporting Hamas and their terrorist acts or countries that clearly don’t really give a sh-t in other circumstances). As it is and because a lot of it is being built on that bad faith, it’s allowing neozionists in Israel to get away with far more than they would normally be getting away with.
History has proven time and time again that this is the worst possible way to do that. Israel is either stupid or is acting intentionally with another purpose.
I think this is unprecedented. Everything about this actually, not just Israel deciding to end Hamas… So I don’t know if history showed this before, I do know that previous attempts at pacifying Hamas - as opposed to ending it - did happen, and we definitely see now they achieved nothing…
Arguments, not proof, also unstated ones - we only see drawn conclusions. Israel didn’t confirm or accept blame, but I won’t deny it could’ve been a mistake or a moment of confusion. But that would still not be “attacking evacuation convoys”, but an isolated case, especially since, it seems according to the article that the designation of safe roads happened after the strike - though the timing is also not exact.
Israel does not want to harm innocent civilians. If you don’t believe that, surely you agree that it has nothing to gain from that but bad influence.
Having seen what Hamas did, can you really deny they’re terrorists, on the same level as ISIS? Filming themselves, kidnapping teens, rape and torture, beheading babies… Parading half naked bodies in the streets to spit and cheer at.
I want Netanyahu out of office. But he’s not running around doing that, don’t be ridiculous.
Interesting thought, when you have countries sending aid to one side or the other, or protests pro one way or the other, makes you think you should have a side.
It’s OK not too have a side. Israel and Palestine have been going at it for so long and the history is so complex that there is literally blame on both sides.
The fact that you consider yourself unqualified to make an opinion probably makes you more qualified to do so than 95% of the idiots out there whose opinions are already firmly established.
It’s really complicated. If you trace back why people did what they did, including motivations, you’ll end up centuries back. I stopped in the Russian revolutionary time period last time I tried.
The Romans created the diaspora in the first place. How relevant that is to the modern conflict is debatable. Zionists certainly use the ancient Jewish kingdoms as evidence of their legitimacy.
I think it does trace that far back then. The diaspora is likely a large contributing factor in why Jews were so often persecuted in Europe, which was what created the desire for a Jewish state in the first place. And I do think that is a fair desire and claim, but the way the British did it was completely wrong.
I was initially siding with Israel as they were hit first, but their response has made me rethink things.
To generalize this out to other wars and conflicts, even regular old arguments, there are almost always pre-existing conditions and tensions leading up to the first major attack. Even things like WWI, where the catalyst was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. But there is quite obviously more to the atmosphere, national ambitions, etc. etc. that make it so that the separatists wanted to assassinate him, and make it so that Austria-Hungary wanted to invade Serbia and used this as an excuse. A war would have happened anyway, no matter who attacked first.
Add comment