Last week, the Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas took a four-day trip to China. There he met with Xi Jinping, who affirmed his interest in “playing a greater role in promoting internal reconciliation in Palestine and realizing peace in the Middle East.” The two also concluded agreements on economic and technological cooperation and announced that their relations would be upgraded to a “strategic partnership.” Jordyn Haime comments:

Abbas’s visit was largely symbolic and more about China affirming its position in the Middle East and on the global stage rather than brokering a realistic peace deal.

Xi offered to mediate Israeli-Palestine peace talks and put forward a three-point proposal that advocates an independent Palestinian state based on pre-1967 borders with east Jerusalem as its capital, more economic support for Palestinians, and a continued peace process. He also expressed interest in playing an “active part” in intra-Palestinian reconciliation, [which would involve] groups like Hamas or Hizballah that China has refused to treat as terrorist organizations.

“China is biased, contrary to [the image] it would like to portray,” [the expert on Chinese Middle East policy] Tuvia Gering said. “It absolves Palestinians of agency and responsibility for the conflict, fails to grasp local dynamics, and ignores Israel’s security challenges in its battle against terrorism.”

The first clause in a five-point joint declaration issued by both sides last week affirmed that the Palestinian Authority adheres to the one-China principle and supports China’s policies in Hong Kong and Xinjiang. “Xinjiang-related issues are not human-rights issues, but issues of anti-terrorism, de-radicalization, and anti-separatism. The Palestinian side firmly opposes using Xinjiang-related issues as an excuse to interfere with Chinese internal affairs,” it read.

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.