When the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) passed a resolution denying the historic connection between the Jewish people and the Temple Mount, China and Russia joined a number of Arab and Muslim states in voting for it. Besides providing more evidence that the Palestinians are more interested in delegitimizing Israel than in establishing a state, writes Yaakov Amidror, the vote also demonstrates that those who imagine Israel exchanging its ties with America for an alliance with Russia or China are deeply deluded:

China is a weak country. It is trying to climb to the top of the global ladder despite fierce opposition, and it needs all the support it can get on the international stage. The Islamic bloc, comprising 57 of the UN’s 193 members, is therefore crucial. . . .

China has nothing against Israel and would like to improve relations in all areas, but cannot ignore the power the Muslim bloc wields at the UN. This is why it cannot change its voting patterns. It has nothing to do with anti-Semitism or the actual diplomatic ties between Israel and China. [Furthermore], there is a gap between the sympathy young Chinese feel for Israel and the views of the older generation, which is still entangled in outdated perceptions and irrelevant historical obligations. . . .

[In] Russia, too, all that matters is the numbers: the Muslim bloc is larger than the bloc of countries that back Israel, so that is the bloc that receives consistent support.

[Additionally], China and Russia share concerns over Islamic extremists, and it is therefore important that they avoid straining their relationships with Muslim countries. . . . This [too] is not a sign of strength but of weakness.

Israelis who cultivate the pipe dream of substituting Israel’s long-term bond with the U.S. with an alliance with China and Russia should take a long, hard look at UNESCO’s resolutions. Moscow’s and Beijing’s policies lack the ethical basis that pervades U.S. policy, and the chances of forging a similar long-term bond with either are slim.

Israel will always be small and will lack sister-states in the international arena. It is much more naturally inclined to foster deep and binding ties with the U.S. than with countries like Russia and China.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.