The Chinese government is not budging from its initial response to the war between Hamas and Israel, refusing to condemn the initial assault over the weekend and appearing determined to remain on the sidelines.
On Tuesday, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Wang Wanbin restated the same talking points that it released over the weekend when it generically urged “all relevant parties to immediately cease fire.”
Meantime, Beijing’s Special Envoy to the Middle East, Zhai Jun, reached out to Arab stakeholders to discuss the crisis but only spoke with relatively low-ranking officials.
On Tuesday, Zhai spoke by phone with Osama Khedr, assistant minister of the Palestine Department in the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and, like Wang, restated Beijing’s longstanding position on the need for a two-state solution.
Beijing’s tepid response to the crisis has prompted a number of prominent scholars and analysts to reflect on how it will impact China’s ambitions to become a major actor in Mideast diplomacy:
- AVOID TAKING SIDES: “Time will tell, but my expectation is that China’s cautious response to Hamas’s attack on Israel will expose the limits of PRC influence in the region. Beijing historically has been wary of being drawn into taking sides. I don’t expect that will change now” — Ryan Haas, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution (@RYANL_HASS)
- U.S. STILL THE BIG POWER: “The U.S. deployment of the Ford carrier strike group is a clear signal that it remains in the region. China’s response seems to prefer Iran over the Palestinians or Saudi Arabia, together with a continued U.S. push for Israel-Saudi normalization could bring a shift in the regional trend away from China” — Gedaliah Afterman, Head of the Asia Policy Program at the Abba Eban Institute for International Diplomacy (@GAFTERMAN)
- TOO RISK AVERSE: “China under Xi wants to be respected and admired everywhere, including in the Middle East, but it is ultimately unwilling to do what it will take to resolve the really hard regional security issues. It goes for the low-hanging fruits and basically stops there” — Steve Tsang, Director of the SOAS China Institute at the University of London (REUTERS)
- STYLE OVER SUBSTANCE: “There was low-hanging fruit that China was going for. Brokering the Saudi-Iran deal was one, and exploring the possibilities of facilitating dialogue between Israel and Palestinians was another. China in recent years seems to be a lot more interested in increasing global perception of its influence, more than actually increasing it” — Wen-Ti Sung, Political Science Lecturer at Australia National University (SYDNEY MORNING HERALD)
- CHINA’S NEUTRALITY WON’T LAST: “China’s “neutral” response to Hamas’s atrocities rhymes w\its response to Putin’s war in Ukraine – surprised, shocked, initially cautious, but within days, firmly supporting Russia with platitudes to territorial integrity, food security, etc. China’s tone will soon shift back” — Tommy Steiner, Policy Director at The Signal Group (@TOMMY_HERZLIYA)
WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? There’s no doubt the war has dealt China a setback in its diplomatic advance in the Middle East, particularly with Israel. The key question now is whether its tepid response to the conflict will damage its reputation in other countries as well, particularly Saudi Arabia, if it chooses to continue to sit on the sidelines as it appears to be doing.
SUGGESTED READING:
- Reuters: Middle East crisis tests limits of China’s diplomatic push by James Pomfret, Joe Cash and Chen Lin
- Bloomberg: Xi’s Reply to Hamas Attack Shows China’s Limit as Peacemaker
