The killing of more than 1,300 innocent Israelis and other nationals in an unprecedented brutal terrorist attack by Hamas on Oct. 7, as well as the kidnapping of more than 150 soldiers and civilians, including women and children, has shaken the world.
Israel’s retaliatory military operation to achieve “a complete siege of the Gaza Strip” has in turn continued to rage.
While the Israeli government has claimed it had recaptured the Gaza borders from the control of Hamas, the current spell of the Israel-Palestine conflict will have a profound impact on the geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East and the rest of the world.
The genesis of the conflict between Israel and Palestine goes back to 1948, when the creation of Israel as an independent nation out of the British Mandate for Palestine led to the first Arab-Israel war.
The entry of Hamas — a terrorist organization — into the political space of Palestine in 2006 and its subsequent control over the Gaza Strip intensified the conflict.
However, this time Hamas’ heinous crimes have assumed huge importance for several reasons:
First, firing 5,000 missiles at Israel in 20 minutes, Hamas aimed to destroy the perception that Israel’s Iron Dome — its missile defense system — is impenetrable.
Second, Hamas also wanted to demonstrate its military capabilities.
Third, by capturing and killing civilians, Hamas wanted to leave an everlasting horror in the minds of Israelis.
Fourth, as Hamas had begun to feel isolated because of the Abraham Accords signed by Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, and peace talks between Israel and Saudi Arabia, it aimed to garner the support of Arab and Muslim states for the cause of Palestine.
Fifth, some experts also believe that Hamas was encouraged by the Russia-Iran-China axis to launch an attack to divert US attention and resources from Ukraine and the Indo-Pacific region.
Although the international community has remained a votary of the establishment of an independent and sovereign state of Palestine, Hamas’ outrageous terrorist act has drawn worldwide condemnation.
Surprisingly, China, which projects itself as a peacemaker in the Middle East, has distanced itself from criticizing Hamas.
The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs initially issued a neutral statement calling on “relevant parties to remain calm, exercise restraint and immediately end the hostilities to protect civilians and avoid further deterioration of the situation.”
Although China strengthened its statement to condemn “all violence and attacks on civilians” after a meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, it has not shown willingness to play the role of mediator between Israel and Hamas.
This has surprised many because in June, China expressed a desire to contribute toward resolving the Palestine-Israel conflict. Its move was taken seriously against the backdrop of Beijing’s success in brokering a peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
China’s muted response to Hamas’ terror acts has revealed its true image and its limitations as a peacemaker in the Middle East.
As Iran supports Hamas, Beijing does not want to jeopardize its economic, energy and other interests with Tehran by condemning Hamas as a terrorist organization. After all, China has nearly US$400 billion of planned investments in Iran in the next few decades.
China also has a strong strategic and economic relationship with Palestine. From 2019 to last year, bilateral trade surged 57 percent to US$6.41 billion.
China is finding it difficult to play the role of mediator between Palestine and Israel without negatively affecting its economic and other interests in the region.
Moreover, it is still not ready to get involved in conflict-resolution exercises in any major global issues, for example, the Palestine-Israel conflict and the Ukraine war.
Although China has aggressively pursued the modernization of its military, it still appears reluctant or is not in a position to relocate its military resources between regions in a short time to restore peace and security.
While the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier strike group was immediately dispatched to the eastern Mediterranean Sea to deter Iran, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and any other actor across the region from exploiting the situation, China — an aspiring superpower — is happy to appeal to the international community to resolve the conflict.
Taiwan is closely watching the Hamas-Israel war even as it faces security threats from China.
Beijing has increased its activity around Taiwan, conducting two large rounds of war games over the past year, so the missile attack by Hamas has prompted Taipei to consider detailed plans to protect itself if faced with a similar attack from China.
It is in this context that Taiwan has established a working group to draw lessons from the Hamas attack.
Another important issue that should attract Taiwan’s attention is Israel’s ability to mobilize more than 300,000 reservists in a short time and its effective retaliation against Hamas.
While US support for Ukraine and Israel has sent a strong message about its commitment to protecting Taiwan, Taipei needs to be more vigilant against China’s military adventurism, because Beijing might try to use the US’ attention on the Middle East as an opportunity to intensify its assertive military posturing. The government should bolster its intelligence-gathering apparatus.
While lessons from the Hamas attack can help Taiwan’s retaliatory capabilities, China’s cold-handed approach to the crisis in the Middle East and the US-led global support to Israel will be a big deterrent for Taiwan against China.
By condemning the Hamas terror attack, Taipei has shown its commitment to peace, security, development and democracy. Hopefully the international community will realize the need to reciprocate by consolidating close ties with Taiwan.
Sumit Kumar is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Delhi and a former Ministry of Foreign Affairs visiting fellow at National Chengchi University.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS