Source: Overseas Network
On the afternoon of June 14, Chinese President Xi Jinping held talks with visiting Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. During this period, Xi Jinping put forward three propositions on the "problem of the century" of the Palestinian-Israeli issue -
First, the fundamental solution to the question of Palestine lies in the establishment of an independent Palestinian State with full sovereignty on the basis of the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital;
Second, the needs of the Palestinian economy and people's livelihood should be guaranteed, and the international community should increase development assistance and humanitarian assistance to Palestine.
Thirdly, we should adhere to the correct direction of peace talks, respect the status quo formed in the history of the religious holy sites in Jerusalem, abandon excessive and provocative words and deeds, promote the convening of a larger, more authoritative and more influential international peace conference, create conditions for the resumption of peace talks, and make practical efforts to help Palestine and Israel coexist peacefully. China is willing to play a positive role in achieving internal reconciliation and promoting peace talks among Pakistan.
These three propositions have attracted wide attention in the international community.
On June 14, President Xi Jinping held a welcoming ceremony for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the North Hall of the Great Hall of the People. Source: Xinhua News Agency
One
The first claim for a "Palestinian State" is preceded by a number of qualifiers, including "fully sovereign and independent, based on the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital". This means that when we help solve regional problems, we should pay attention to the "historical context" and the local situation.
In European history, cooperation and contradiction, integration and exclusion between Jewish and Christian societies coexisted. In the mid-19th and early 20th centuries, nationalist movements arose in Europe, and some Jewish intellectuals saw that mainstream European society ignored the assimilation efforts of Jews and that there were deep contradictions between the economic interests and cultural traditions of the two sides, so the idea of "independent statehood" was born.
But most European Jews were scattered in major cities and parts of the countryside, with no contiguous "territories" with clear boundaries or fiefdom traditions. "Independence of statehood" requires thinking about establishing immigrant societies overseas. At that time, Zionist activists envisioned statehood in Africa and Latin America, and finally chose Palestine, where Jerusalem, the holy site of Judaism, is located.
A group of secular political activists who have been highly receptive to religious traditions and historical legends in the choice of location.
Later, through emigration, land purchases, and British help (Palestine became a British mandate after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire), European Jews emigrated to Palestine, establishing exclusive communities and even nations.
The biggest difference between this society and ordinary immigrant society is the fact that both subjectively and objectively result in the replacement of indigenous people and cultures. If you go to present-day Israel, you can see many biblical place names, but this is not a "miraculous continuation" of two thousand years of history, but because these places were renamed after the disappearance of Arab villages. It is clear that this process will be accompanied by a humanitarian catastrophe.
That is why the question of Palestine is a root cause of the Middle East problem. Europeans (whether Western Jews or otherwise) consciously or unconsciously transferred their contradictions systematically outside Europe. This has happened more than once in the world, but the Palestinian-Israeli issue is undoubtedly the most representative and historic case in West Asia.
A protester holds a Palestinian flag along the border with Israel in the Gaza Strip. Source: The Paper
Two
History is long, let's make a long story short.
In November 1947, the United Nations adopted the partition resolution. But soon after, the first Middle East war broke out between the Arab states and the emerging Israel. Note that the wars here were not fought on the Palestinian state, because the Arab states of Palestine were not successfully established. At that time, Israel's enemies were the coalition forces of neighboring Arab countries and Palestinian civilians, who had no clear political organization.
The war created a large refugee problem, which remains unresolved to this day. In recent days, he has also visited the local Palestinian refugee camp in Beirut, where these are Palestinians but have never returned home.
After the first Middle East war, Israel occupied more territory than was allocated in UN resolutions, and Arab land was limited to the West Bank (administered by Jordan) and Gaza (administered by Egypt), which is about 1/5 of the historical Palestine; After the Third Middle East War in 1967, Israel occupied East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip for many years under military rule, occupying 100 per cent of historic Palestinian land.
This is the context of the Palestinian national liberation movement. In other words, the Palestinian-Israeli issue is not the usual "territorial dispute between the two states", but a problem between the occupiers and the independence movement. This should be the basic starting point for our understanding of the contemporary Palestinian-Israeli issue.
Therefore, the "1967 border" advocated by the two-state solution is the result of great concessions by the Palestinian side - what they want is only 1/5 of the historical homeland.
Map of Palestinian border changes from 1946 to 2010 (Source: Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
The existing contradiction is that Israel, while withdrawing and continuing the siege of Gaza, has not withdrawn from the West Bank. The area changed from Israeli military administration to joint administration with the PLO, which renounced armed resistance, but the West Bank did not become a truly contiguous territorial entity. Instead, the West Bank is dotted with Jewish settlements.
And this one-fifth of Palestine, due to geopolitical considerations and religious texts, also believes that it should not only be truly independent, but also the "core area" of traditional Israeli culture, which they believe was the seat of Israel and the kingdom of Judah 2,800 years ago.
So why does China emphasize "full sovereignty"? This is because the Israeli occupation has not ended, although recognized by the 139 member states of the United Nations (almost all of Asia, Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe, except Sweden and Iceland).
The Palestinian Authority now controls only a few towns, the periphery of which could be settlements or Israeli garrison bases; Palestine has no currency of its own, no borders of its own garrison; The border between Palestine and Jordan is also administered by Israel. If you want to go to Palestine, you can't get a Palestinian visa, and you won't have a Palestinian entry stamp on your passport, and Israel is managing customs; Israel has the right to administer both economic and humanitarian goods. Even the eligibility of foreigners to live permanently in the West Bank is ultimately reviewed by Israel's Ministry of Internal Affairs.
In other words, Palestine has only de jure sovereignty and lacks actual sovereignty.
This is the meaning of China's proposal of "full sovereignty".
Palestinian President Abbas, centre, addresses the high-level meeting of the United Nations Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People on 15 May. Source: Xinhua News Agency
Three
It should be said that full sovereignty, especially in the areas of economy, civil administration and border customs, can fundamentally improve the livelihood of the Palestinian people. Otherwise, there is a high risk that international aid will not be distributed directly to Palestinian civilians in need.
The issue of peace talks mentioned in the third proposal is China's consistent stand for resolving international issues. "Palestinian internal reconciliation" is also crucial because of the geographical and political organizational separation between the West Bank and Gaza. But the biggest challenge to truly effective peace talks is Israel's attitude.
At present, Israel's control of the West Bank is quite secure, it also has an overwhelming military advantage over Gaza, and lacks the motivation for peace talks. Neither rockets in Gaza nor the occasional lone wolf attack have changed Israel's overall dominance.
But peace efforts cannot be abandoned. Years of "cold peace" based on overwhelming military superiority are not the best results, and they are not only unfair to the Palestinian people, but also continue to cause human and psychological distress to Israeli civilians. If the Palestinian-Israeli contradiction is not resolved, Israel will not truly integrate into West Asia; As a representative of the West, it is also difficult for Israel to coexist peacefully with its neighbors, and exporting violence and transferring contradictions to its neighbors will still be its way to maintain its own security, which is obviously not conducive to regional peace and development.
Text/Mei Hualong
(Assistant Professor, Department of West Asian Studies, Peking University and Research Fellow, Institute of Israel and Jewish Studies)
Editors/Ayanami, Dot So
Source/Xia Ke Island WeChat public account