Red Sea Crisis Is Opportunity for U.S. to Weaken Europe & China
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 28, 2024
The Red Sea conflict is intensifying as is the impact on commercial shipping and the global economy, according to shipping news reports.
One might think that common sense would prevail here to solve the conflict diplomatically and quickly. If a ceasefire was called in Gaza to stop the horrendous slaughter of Palestinian civilians by Israel then that would end the restrictions imposed on shipping by Yemen.
Yemeni leaders have unequivocally said so. End the genocide and we will end the interdiction on shipping.
The moral imperative to immediately end the appalling suffering in Gaza is therefore a straightforward – not to say absolutely necessary – way to restore normal navigation through the Red Sea and for wider peace in the region. It’s not a dilemma. It’s not a conundrum. And it’s inexcusable to prevaricate.
The United States has the power to end the Israeli genocide. But the Biden administration has refused to exert its control over the Netanyahu regime.
Washington has opted to escalate the military aggression in the Red Sea by launching at least eight waves of air strikes since January 11 on Yemen – the poorest nation in the Arab region, having already suffered a genocidal war at the hands of the U.S. and Britain supporting Saudi Arabia’s aggression between 2015 and 2022.
The Yemenis have in turn defiantly warned that their operations to interdict shipping will continue until the genocidal siege on Gaza has ended.
Biden even admits that the military action to deter the Yemenis is limited in achieving its supposed objectives.
So, why continue to aggravate the situation and escalate potential conflict across the region? Not only will bombing Yemen not work, but it is also inflaming violence across the Middle East and risking a head-on confrontation with Iran which is allied with the Yemenis.
As Iranian Professor Mohammad Marandi points out in our interview this week a big incentive for the U.S. and its Israeli ally is to blow up the region as a reckless and nefarious way to conceal how disastrous the defeat in Gaza is for the Americans and their Israeli client regime.
But there may be more to it. Another incentive for taking a militarized response to the Red Sea crisis is the strategic gain that this gives the United States with regard to Europe and China.
The Red Sea shipping restrictions are hitting the European and Chinese trade most acutely. American economic interests are relatively unaffected.
It is estimated that about 60 percent of China’s exports to Europe are shipped through the Red Sea, according to the Washington DC-based Middle East Institute.
Put another way, Eurostat figures indicate that 20 percent of all EU imports come from Asia via the Red Sea.
Inevitably, the longer the insecurity and hostilities persist in the Red Sea, the worse will be the damage to Europe-China trade and their economies.
Reuters reports that China is urging Iran to rein in the actions of the Ansar Allah and Yemeni armed forces in the Red Sea. That indicates how severe the impasse is impacting Chinese trade with Europe.
The Europeans meanwhile seem oblivious to the damage that the United States’ policy is inflicting on their economies. The Europeans have meekly gone along with Washington’s militarized aggression against Yemen.
It is a long-term and deeply coveted goal for Washington to cleave European trade and political relations with China. China has become the European Union’s top trading partner, surpassing the United States in that historic role.
During recent Democrat and Republican administrations, Washington has vigorously sought to undermine European-Chinese relations. The Americans have reacted testily to any trade and investment pacts signed between the two.
The Red Sea crisis is thus a handy opportunity for the United States to kill two birds with one stone.
By ramping up the shipping problems through militarizing the conditions, the U.S. can weaken the economies of Europe and China while also sticking a very big wedge between the two.
In short-term American imperial calculation that is a tantalizing gain. The U.S. consolidates its hegemonic control over the weaker European allies while damaging China’s economic power.
This short-term zero-sum thinking by the American imperial planners is of course self-defeating in the long term from the far-reaching deterioration in the global economy and international peace and security. But long-term thinking about the common global good is not a priority for U.S. capitalist imperialism. One might even say they are fundamentally in opposition.
There is a close analogy here to the Ukraine crisis. Washington has pursued hostilities with Russia as a way to undermine European-Russian trade and their wider cultural and political relations. Washington calculates that such antagonism will bolster its hegemonic ambitions. The ideologically slavish European leaders have gone along with that policy even though it has resulted in an economic and security disaster for Europe.
The European leaders are either too stupid or too brainwashed to assess what is going on and how they are being manipulated by Washington for its selfish strategic interests.
If the European regimes had any independence or integrity they would not have gone down the path of conflict with Russia in Ukraine. But as it is, they have been had by Uncle Sam – big time. What’s more, they don’t seem to realize or even care.
Likewise, the same fate of shooting themselves in the foot is occurring over the Middle East crisis. The Europeans are backing a genocide in Gaza in deference to U.S. imperialist interests and the Israeli regime. That has rebounded with the Red Sea crisis that is set to hammer EU-China trade. Rather than seeking to resolve the conflict diplomatically, the Europeans are making it worse and in the process damaging their own international standing and strategic interests.
No wonder the Americans ultimately treat their European vassals with contempt. Because they are utterly spineless and clueless.
Saudi, Chinese vessels undeterred by Yemen Red Sea ops
The Cradle | January 26, 2024
Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, is continuing to send oil and fuel tankers through the Red Sea, despite US and UK bombing of Yemen and attacks by Yemen’s armed forces on Israeli, US, and UK-linked ships passing through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait.
“We’re moving in the Red Sea with our oil and products cargoes,” Mohammed al-Qahtani, head of Aramco’s refining and oil trading and marketing businesses, told Bloomberg on 26 January.
The risks of continuing to use the Red Sea route to Europe amid the violence are “manageable,” he said.
In November, Yemen’s de-facto government, led by the Ansarallah resistance movement, began targeting ships with Israeli links and ships traveling to Israel via the Red Sea and Suez Canal.
Ansarallah took the decision in response to Israel’s bombing and ground campaign against Gaza, which many view as a genocide.
Rather than press Israel to end attacks on Gaza, the US and UK began bombing targets in Yemen, endangering not only Israeli-linked ships but ships from other nations as well.
In response, many of the world’s largest shipping companies began redirecting ships around the Horn of Africa, adding two weeks to the journey from Asia to Europe.
But in January, Aramco increased crude shipments through the Red Sea toward Europe, according to vessel tracking data compiled by Bloomberg.
“That is also giving us huge access and optionality,” Qahtani said. “We are assessing that almost on a daily basis.”
He said that the cost of these shipments has increased, as few shipping companies are willing to travel the route, and insurance costs have risen. “But overall it’s is very manageable.”
Most Saudi crude is exported east to Asia, but the kingdom has been able to continue using the Red Sea route for western shipments due to its continued ties with the Yemeni government.
Saudi Arabia and Ansarallah continue to negotiate a formal end to the war they fought between 2015 and 2022.
As western shipping companies have rerouted their ships, Chinese firms have stepped in to fill the void, as China also enjoys good relations with Ansarallah and does not fear its ships being attacked in the Red Sea.
Chinese firms have been serving ports such as Doraleh in Djibouti, Hodeidah in Yemen, and Jeddah in Saudi Arabia, which all saw major drops in port traffic following the attacks.
Cichen Shen, the China expert at Lloyd’s List Intelligence, told the Financial Times that the “easiest explanation” for the rush of Chinese operators into the region was that they seek to exploit their relative invulnerability to attack to win business.
“You have commercial interest and you see this capacity gap and you see the demand,” Shen said of the lines’ motivation for moving ships to the region. “I think the commercial interest is probably the biggest reason.”
Insurance underwriters insert ‘no connection to Israel’ clause for shipping
MEMO | January 25, 2024
Insurance underwriters are requiring some clients to sign contracts guaranteeing that they have no connection to Israel or the US in order to obtain cover for cargo ships passing through the Suez Canal, the New York Times has reported. The demand comes as Houthi attacks in the Red Sea have pushed up insurance premiums for merchant vessels.
According to the NYT, the attacks at this critical choke point handling 12 per cent of global trade have more than doubled the average worldwide shipping costs. Some ships are opting to avoid the Suez Canal and instead take the longer route around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, adding weeks to delivery times.
Passing through the Red Sea still necessitates expensive speciality war risk insurance offered by London brokers to cover potential Houthi strikes. Rates have jumped as much as 50 times more than before the Yemen conflict, and now cost up to one per cent of a ship’s value despite relatively minimal damage to ships so far. For a ship carrying goods worth $100 million, that could mean an extra $1m to be insured.
Insurers blame the increased risk on Israel’s military offensive against the Palestinians in Gaza. By forcing clients to guarantee that they have no ties with Israel and its Western allies, underwriters aim to shield themselves from inadvertently covering any vessels associated with the current geopolitical tensions underlying the attacks.
Analysts say that the ripple effects on global trade and consumer prices are still unfolding. They warn that if Red Sea transit remains high-risk, inflation could return.
The demand by underwriters follows previous preventative measures taken by vessels to avoid Houthi attacks. Earlier this month, cargo ships passing into the Red Sea began to declare that they have no links to Israel, according to data from the navigation safety feature known as the Automatic Identification System (AIS), which transmits the identity, location and destination of larger vessels.
Israel’s Western allies appear to be running out of options in their attempt to contain the Houthis. Yesterday, the Financial Times revealed that the US has urged China to help curb Houthi attacks around the crucial Bab Al-Mandab Strait. Chinese ships are not being targeted by the Yemeni group and nor are vessels of countries that are not supporting Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza. Nevertheless, China is reported to have expressed “concern” about the attacks, and called for “restraint”.
China-led multipolarity has accelerated the decline of the American era, the war in Gaza may end it altogether.
By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan | The Cradle | January 24, 2024
What is unfolding today in West Asia — the Gaza war and its regional expansion — cannot be viewed separately from the international transformations that have grown in momentum over the past few years. Today, the transition to multipolarity is the underlying factor shaping the decisions and policies of most countries, particularly those of the great powers.
The timing of Israel’s devastating military assault on Gaza coincides with heightened US attention on its great power competition for Washington, this conflict has much wider geopolitical significance beyond West Asia. In this context, the US has assumed, and will continue to play, a pivotal role in Gaza and its environs, unlike its powerful peers in China and Russia.
According to statistics published by the China Society for Human Rights Studies, the US initiated 201 of the 248 armed conflicts that took place since the end of World War II, often engaging in these wars via US-led alliances and/or proxies.
For decades, Washington has led these conflicts by very ably forming, then leading, and directing broad alliances to achieve its political and military objectives. But that ability notably shifted in December 2023, signaling a sharp decline in this capability.
In response to Yemen’s Ansarallah-aligned armed forces’ Red Sea blockade of Israeli-linked vessels, the US Department of Defense announced the formation of “Operation Guardian of Prosperity … to uphold the foundational principle of freedom of navigation” in those waters, initially consisting of a coalition of ten countries, most of them insignificant partners.
Protecting Israel or maintaining maritime dominance?
The coalition proved shaky from the get-go, with only the US and Britain actively involved in military strikes on Yemen. The reluctance of key European countries France, Spain, and Italy to join the naval alliance indicated a growing skepticism among the US’s traditional partners — both western and West Asian — about Washington’s commitment and capability to defend its allies in any impactful way.
Interestingly, more than eight further countries reportedly joined the coalition, but demanded anonymity, given the potential political fallout from associating with Washington and Tel Aviv.
Crucially, the Pentagon’s stated purpose of securing navigation in the Red Sea does not align with the actual threat presented, revealing ulterior motives behind US actions. The Yemenis have repeatedly confirmed that they only intend to inhibit the passage of Israeli-owned or destined vessels — and that all other ships are free to pass.
In short, the US/UK-led coalition is acting as a naval arm for Israeli military forces, seeking specifically to ensure unimpeded access for ships heading to Israeli ports via the Bab al-Mandab Strait. That’s not a position many other states will get behind if they want to maintain freedom of transport for their own shipping vessels.
Ultimately, the American show of force in these waterways seeks to consolidate US naval dominance, which war-torn Yemen, West Asia’s poorest country, has contested.
As outlined in the National Security Strategy for 2022:
The US “will not allow foreign or regional powers to jeopardize freedom of navigation through the Middle East’s (West Asia) waterways, including the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al Mandab, nor tolerate efforts by any country to dominate another — or the region — through military buildups, incursions, or threats.”
According to media reports following massive US airstrikes against Iraqi targets on 23 January, Iraqi resistance factions will now also follow Yemen’s suit by implementing a blockade of Israeli ports in the Mediterranean Sea.
Current events are spiraling out of Washington’s control as onlookers increasingly question the utility and competence of US naval leadership in the world’s important waterways. Equally, there is recognition that other formidable forces and states have emerged, challenging US control over key global straits. In the words of British politician and writer Walter Raleigh, “Who rules the seas rules the world.” Under Sanaa’s watch, the US no longer can claim rule over the Red Sea or even its adjacent waterways.
Great power competition amid the Gaza war
The current scenario in West Asia, particularly post-Al-Aqsa Flood and the Gaza war that followed, coincides with a shift in Washington’s focus toward competition with China and its proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. As outlined in the US intelligence community’s annual threat assessment last year, this transition has already affected strategic goals, leading to a sharp decline in western support, especially from the US, for Ukraine. The Biden administration faced challenges in securing Congressional approval for a new aid package for Kiev, which directly competed for dollars against Tel Aviv’s military campaign in Gaza.
Despite assurances from western leaders during visits to Ukraine in October, their statements came without tangible material support, leaving President Volodymyr Zelensky in the proverbial dust. Quite unexpectedly, China has emerged as a potential peacemaker in this European conflict, with Kiev openly requesting Beijing’s involvement in mediation talks, and the US itself open to Chinese mediation to mitigate the escalation in West Asia.
The Chinese are well aware that there are no simple, face-saving exits for the US from the Gaza war it has championed and that the conflict’s metamorphosis into a regional one mires the US deeper into West Asia — and away from the Asia-Pacific.
Although China seeks to increase its presence in West Asia, it is very careful not to bog itself down in the region’s many issues. But Washington’s request that Beijing use its influence to sway Iran from conflict escalation makes clear that the US is no longer “the biggest power” in the region.
Why Israel opposes multipolarity
Following Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, US financial and military support for Israel has reached a critical stage, presenting two options for Washington. The first involves imposing some control on Israeli actions, given that the war’s timing has been unfavorable to US strategic interests, particularly in a critical election year. The second option, favored by the Washington elite, is to continue its unwavering support to Tel Aviv, even at the risk of damage to its global image.
Sustained global outrage over the Gaza war, coupled with the landmark genocide case filed against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), shows that Washington’s ability to cover for Israel is diminishing rapidly. Again, this reflects the global shift in the balance of power toward multipolarity, which is marked by the widespread decline of American influence.
But the US support for the Gaza genocide has had dramatic domestic repercussions, too. Polls show a major shift in the attitudes of young Americans, especially university youth, who will make up the ranks of America’s future leaders.
A Harvard-Harris poll published on 17 January reveals that 46 percent of respondents aged 18-24 believe that Hamas’ actions on 7 October can be justified because of the injustice to which the Palestinians are subjected. The same poll shows that 43 percent of the same group support Hamas in this war, and that 57 percent believe that Israel is carrying out massacres in Gaza. The most staggering poll result of all, though, has to be the one in December (conducted by the same pollsters) in which 51 percent of young Americans believe a final solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is for Israel to end and be given to Hamas and the Palestinians.
While Israel remains a direct US interest in West Asia, Washington’s commitment to Tel Aviv’s security has already become a growing burden and increasingly difficult to justify. As the region’s Axis of Resistance expands its battle with Israel on new, multiple frontlines, the US will need to reallocate ever-expanding resources and focus on matching its international rivals in further-flung geographies.
Ukraine was a test run compared to this Gaza war and the immense, direct toll it is taking on US alliances, domestic politics, and the American image globally. For Israel, this presents an existential crisis beyond measure, as Washington is forced to compete with other great powers, none of whom are ideologically driven to support Zionism as part of their foreign policies.
China Slams US, Issues Statement With Arab League Calling for Gaza Ceasefire
Sputnik – 16.01.2024
“The US, which is pouring fuel on the fire in the Israel-Palestine conflict, also wants to play the role of fireman,” read an article in Chinese media criticizing America’s “unconditional support for Israel.”
China released a joint statement with Arab League nations Sunday urging a ceasefire in Gaza and advocating a two-state solution to resolve the long running Palestine-Israel conflict.
The resolution emerged after Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi met Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul-Gheit in Cairo, Egypt.
The statement called for dialogue with Palestinian groups and a global peace conference to move towards implementing a two-state solution, advocating a “government of Palestine for the Palestinians.” The leaders urged the full implementation of resolutions passed by the United Nations which have long criticized the Israeli occupation of internationally-recognized Palestinian territory. The United States typically uses its influence and position on the UN Security Council to block and undermine resolutions criticizing Israel’s conduct.
The leaders also promoted the resumption of direct peace talks between the Israeli and Palestinian sides.
The statement then touched on recent US and UK-backed airstrikes against the Houthi movement in Yemen, which Chinese media criticized as an “escalation” of the situation and an attempt to distract from the broader conflict. Chinese media called for the respect of the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of Yemen,” a critique of the airstrikes that it noted lacked authorization by the UN.
Finally, China called for the sending of humanitarian aid to Palestinians, which it labeled an “imperative moral responsibility.” China insisted that the only way to ultimately safeguard commercial interests in the Red Sea is to achieve “a just settlement of the Palestinian issue.”
“We have a common responsibility to ensure the security of the Red Sea, and we will not be deceived by the US to fuel such tensions,” said Li Weijian, a researcher at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies.
China and Arab League countries also vowed to move forward on economic cooperation via China’s Belt and Road initiative during the meeting.
Philippines Plans South China Sea Escalation With US Support
By Chimauchem Nwosu – Sputnik – 15.01.2024
Washington’s increased military activities in the South China Sea could potentially destabilize regional peace and stability, as Manila is influenced and urged by the US to follow the path of confrontation.
The Philippines’ top brass has stated its intentions to advance its bases in the South China Sea and increase its naval fleet and radars, despite thawing relations with its Chinese neighbor.
Romeo Brawner Jr., Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, told the press that his country wants to make its outposts in the area more habitable — a move bound to fuel tensions over disputed maritime borders.
Filipino President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has told the armed forces to seek the support of foreign militaries as it shifts focus from internal security to maritime defense.
The Philippines is a key US ally in the region and hosts its military bases, used during US wars in Vietnam and Korea.
But in recent times, Washington has shifted towards “great power competition” with China, co-opting Manila as a tool in its quest to “contain” Beijing.
Tensions between the Asian nations have intensified since October 4, 2023, with reports of Flippino ships defying Chinese Coast Guard warnings to pass through the Second Thomas Shoal in the Spratly Islands of the South China Sea on a resupply mission.
Early December last year, the Philippines established a monitoring base for its coast guard on Thitu Island in the disputed South China Sea. It also announced its intentions to increase joint patrols with the US and Australia in the area to curtail what it perceives as “pure bullying” by China, a Filipino official told media.
In response, Beijing has stated that such patrols potentially exacerbate a larger conflict that could plunge the region into chaos and criticized Manila’s plan as a provocation.
Chinese authorities have also accused the US of escalating tensions in the Asia-Pacific, especially in the South China Sea, and condemned Washington’s attempts to thwart China-Taiwan relations.
Washington insists that its ships will sail wherever they want in what it defines as international waters. The US has reiterated its resolve to defend the Philippines in the event of an attack, including in the South China Sea.
But China’s Foreign Ministry said heightened US military activities in the South China Sea further worsens the situation and subverts international law and its sovereignty.
“The US instigated and emboldened the Philippine side to infringe upon China’s sovereignty, which escalated maritime tensions. The Chinese side firmly opposes that,” Senior Colonel Wu Qian, spokesperson for China’s Ministry of National Defense, said during a news conference.
Despite the deteriorating tensions, Marcos has stated that the Philippines will continuously assert its rights in the South China Sea. “We shall continue to assert our rights in accordance with the Philippine Constitution and international law,” Marcos remarked. This follows Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s caution that ties between Beijing and Manila are “facing serious difficulties” and warned against colluding with “malicious external forces.”
Taiwan: cross-strait brinkmanship to continue
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JANUARY 15, 2024
Taiwan’s electoral laws provide for the candidate with the highest number of votes becoming the winner on a first-past-the-post basis, and it is a moot point that the incumbent Vice President William Lai from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) who secured only 40 percent of votes is still elected as the next president.
The DPP suffered a setback in the legislative election too, losing its majority in the 113-seat legislature and falling behind the Nationalist Party (KMT). In effect, it is an electoral outcome akin to what prevails in France or Brazil, for instance, with the exception that both Emmanuel Macron and Lula da Silva won a majority of votes cast in the second round.
Such hair-splitting may seem irrelevant but then, there are ‘local characteristics’ in the situation around Taiwan that add to the complexity of Sunday’s election result.
Chinese President Xi Jinping has made ‘national rejuvenation’ a goal for Beijing to reach by mid-century — and, bringing Taiwan under its control and reunifying China is part of that rejuvenation vision. In his New Year address, Xi Jinping insisted that the “reunification of the motherland is a historical inevitability.”
In this narrative, mainland China and Taiwan were separated at a certain point in time because of being ‘a weak nation’, an issue that would be resolved when ‘rejuvenation’ is achieved. Therefore, the issue is a core question for the Chinese Communist Party’s legitimacy.
On the other hand, Lai and the DPP see Taiwan as an independent country, whereas, the two main opposition parties who between them garnered 60% of votes in Sunday’s poll do not subscribe to such a stance. The Beijing-friendly Kuomintang (KMT) opposes Taiwan independence and advocates ‘pragmatic dialogue’ while the other rival, the Taiwan People’s Party, proposes engaging with Beijing and maintaining peace.
In sum, the majority of Taiwanese public opinion falls short of endorsing independence for the country and also prefers the path of dialogue and engagement with Beijing rather than confrontation. Indeed, some analysts in Taiwan estimate that the result of the legislative election may eventually clear the way for policies to promote exchanges with the mainland, such as reducing restrictions on mainland students and tourists and even promote communication.
Unsurprisingly, Beijing is extremely critical of Lai who once described himself as a “pragmatic worker for Taiwan independence” and whose vice presidential candidate also happens to be a famous figure in the Beltway, having served as Taiwan’s de facto ambassador to the US.
The crux of the matter is that the Taiwan question cuts to the heart of a broader geopolitical rivalry between the US and China. Put differently, how Beijing is going to interpret the ascendance of a third successive government in Taipei led by the pro-independence DPP will be crucial. Will Beijing feel the need to up the stakes? That is a big question.
To be sure, Sunday’s vote will not only decide Taiwan’s policy with Beijing for years to come, but also geopolitics in the Asia-Pacific region and US-China relations. Military tensions are already on the rise. Under Lai, who takes over as president in May, Washington will no doubt continue to regard Taiwan as a ‘like-minded’ partner. That, in turn, will complicate the fragile US-China relationship.
And any surge in the US-China rivalry can only increase the strategic value of Taiwan for Washington, which will in any case continue to play the Taiwan card against Beijing, as it has been a low-cost, high-return game for the Americans to play — so far at least.
By internationalising the Taiwan question, which is essentially China’s internal problem, and by drumming up a propaganda campaign against Beijing’s so-called assertiveness in the region and beyond, the US has thrown down the gauntlet at China’s diplomats who are quickly damned as ‘wolf warriors’ if they react robustly.
Indeed, the strategy brought dividends insofar as the US’ Asia-Pacific allies Japan, Australia, South Korea and the Philippines, who depend on Washington to guarantee their security, as well as the NATO allies, to a lesser extent, who feel constrained to follow Washington’s lead on the Taiwan issue under the rubric of ‘collective deterrence’.
The bottom line is, Washington realises that it is unrealistic and difficult for the US alone to respond to China’s material national power and needs to mobilise the assets of its allies and like-minded partners to strengthen ‘collective deterrence.’
In fact, the European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell last year called on European navies to patrol the Taiwan Strait to “show Europe’s commitment” to the region.
However, interestingly, the countries of the Global South — the so-called ‘global majority’ — have remained unmoved and are unwilling to risk their China relations over Taiwan and are not in the least interested in taking sides in the US-China rivalry.
Beijing knows that it is in a strong position vis-a-vis Taipei and that Lai has very few options and very little room for manoeuvring. Arguably, Beijing’s real challenge lies in showing its grave displeasure without going to war. It may require that Beijing expands its playbook without pushing regional allies further into the US camp.
From the initial rhetoric, it appears that Beijing has not decided how to respond to the DPP victory. China’s full response may play out over months or years, but the likelihood is that the Taiwan election cannot change the direction of cross-strait relations, which also means that the dynamic of brinkmanship and stress will continue.
Reporting on Sunday’s poll, the New York Times wrote that “To Beijing, the (Taiwan) island is a remnant of its civil war that the United States has no business meddling with. To Washington, it (Taiwan) is the first line of defence for global stability… and the microprocessor factory for the world.”
Indeed, in geo-strategic terms, the US sees Taiwan as a crucial link in the so-called first island chain that runs from Borneo to the Philippines, Japan and South Korea, where the American bases would curtail the deployment of Chinese presence in the western Pacific.
But such a cold-war era containment strategy is dated, on the one hand, with the advent of new transport planes, strategic bombers, aircraft carriers and hypersonic missiles that have a multiplier effect on the Chinese military capabilities, while, on the other hand, the AI-driven military technology and machine learning may create lasting change across the national security enterprise.
In fact, the San Francisco summit between President Joe Biden and Xi turned out to be AI’s ‘Oppenheimer moment,’ as the two leaders agreed to “work together to assess the threats posed by AI” with a view to develop concrete regulatory frameworks to prevent the potentially destabilising consequences of the rapid development of military AI outstripping international law.
When knowledge networks collide with any new technology, different futures tend to appear on the horizon that call for prudence and a more robust dialogue. Significantly, the surcharged Taiwanese elections did not discourage the US and Chinese defence officials from holding their ‘policy coordination talks’ at the Pentagon last week on Monday and Tuesday — the first such in-person meetings since before the coronavirus pandemic.
In a statement in Beijing, the Chinese defence spokesperson said on Friday that Beijing “expects the US side to develop a right perception of China, respect the core interests and major concerns of the Chinese side, and take concrete actions to work with China in the same direction to follow through the important consensus reached by the two heads of state in San Francisco.”
China Rebukes US State Dept for Sending ‘Gravely Wrong Signal’ to Taiwan
Sputnik – 14.01.2024
China resolutely opposes any official interaction between the US and Taiwan and any American interference in Taiwan’s internal affairs, regardless of the reasons, and calls on Washington to strictly adhere to the one-China principle and the joint communiques.
China has condemned the US State Department’s recent remarks on Taiwan’s election, saying they blatantly disregard the one-China policy and the agreed China-US joint communiques, the country’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Sunday.
“The US State Department’s statement […] also sends a gravely wrong signal to the ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces. We strongly deplore and resolutely oppose it, and have made serious representations to the US side,” the statement read.
Emphasizing the importance of the Taiwan issue to China’s core interests, the ministry reiterated that upholding the one-China principle is crucial to maintaining stable China-US relations and is a globally recognized norm in international affairs.
The ministry also warned US leaders against supporting Taiwan independence, the notion of “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan,” and against using the Taiwan issue to contain China.
“China firmly opposes the US having any form of official interaction with Taiwan and interfering in Taiwan affairs in any way or under any pretext. We urge the US to earnestly abide by the one-China principle and the three China-US joint communiqués and act seriously in accordance with the commitments that have been reaffirmed multiple times,” the statement explained.
“We urge the US to stop interactions of an official nature with Taiwan and stop sending any wrong signal to the separatist forces for ‘Taiwan independence’,” it added.
Elections for Taiwan’s regional leader and members of parliament were held on Saturday with a 69.8% voter turnout, according to the local election committee. Lai Ching-te of Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was declared the winner leader’s election with 40.05% of the vote, with ballots from 17,759 of 17,795 polling stations counted. However, the DPP itself lost 11 parliamentary seats in the election. Lai will be inaugurated on May 20, 2024.
Congratulating Lai on his victory, the US State Department released a statement saying: “We also congratulate the Taiwan people for once again demonstrating the strength of their robust democratic system and electoral process.”
“The partnership between the American people and the people on Taiwan, rooted in democratic values, continues to broaden and deepen across economic, cultural, and people-to-people ties. We look forward to working with Dr. Lai and Taiwan’s leaders of all parties to advance our shared interests and values, and to further our longstanding unofficial relationship,” it added.
UNSC has not authorized force against Yemen; China urges all parties concerned to abide by international law
Global Times | January 13, 2024
China opposes any forcible transfer of the Palestinian people from the Gaza Strip, and all measures must be taken to alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe and make a cease-fire the most urgent task of the moment, China’s permanent representative to the UN Zhang Jun said during a UN Security Council conference on Friday local time.
An immediate ceasefire has become the overwhelming call of the international community, but a permanent member of UN Security Council (UNSC) has vetoed the consensus reached by the UNSC in this regard on various grounds, which is a blatant defiance of international fairness, justice and the authority of UNSC, Zhang said.
The UNSC failed to adopt a draft resolution on December 8, 2023 that would have demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza due to a veto cast by the US. Many countries expressed disappointment over the US veto of the Gaza-related draft.
It is a blatant double standard for some people to talk about the protection of human rights and the prevention of genocide while pretending to be deaf and dumb, covering up and diverting attention from the tragic situation in Gaza, Zhang remarked, “We must remove all interference and take vigorous action to quell the war, save lives and restore peace.”
In addition, Zhang stressed that that any forcible transfer of the Palestinian people must be firmly rejected.
Over the past three months, millions of Palestinian people have been forced to relocate repeatedly and were under constant threat to their lives, said Zhang, noting that China is gravely concerned about the “voluntary emigration” of Gaza people, which has been advocated by some Israeli politicians.
The horrific idea of displacing two million people from Gaza and turning it into a “safe zone” devoid of human habitation, if implemented, would constitute a grave crime under international law and completely destroy prospects for the “Two-State solution,” Zhang remarked.
The Chinese envoy called for all measures to be taken to alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe in the Gaza Strip.
Zhang said it was totally unacceptable for Israel to accuse the UN of not having the will and capacity to provide humanitarian relief when it was clear that Israel was accountable for the continued bombing and striking in Gaza and setting obstacles to the entry of humanitarian supplies.
He urged Israel to immediately cease its indiscriminate military attacks and destruction of Gaza.
UNSC resolutions 2712 and 2720 must be fully implemented, and Israel must fulfil its obligations as the occupying party to guarantee the safety of humanitarian workers and provide full cooperation with humanitarian relief efforts, Zhang said.
The envoy reiterated that a ceasefire must be implemented with the utmost urgency. “Only a ceasefire can prevent greater civilian casualties and humanitarian disasters and create conditions for the early release of all hostages; only a ceasefire can prevent the complete destruction of the basis of the Two-State solution; and only a ceasefire can prevent the entire Middle East region from being drawn into a catastrophe.”
Regarding the recent attacks launched by US and UK on Yemen against the Houthi rebels, which targeted Israeli-linked ships in the Red Sea, Zhang expressed concerns about the spillover effects of the Gaza crisis.
Zhang said at a UNSC emergency conference on the Red Sea situation on the same day that the UNSC has never authorized any country to use force against Yemen. The military action taken by the related countries runs counter to the UN resolution 2722, which the Security Council has just adopted.
The envoy warned that the Middle East region is on the brink of extreme danger, and what should be avoided now is reckless military adventurism. He added that what is needed most of all is calm and restraint to prevent further expansion of the conflict.
China urges all parties concerned, especially the influential powers, to abide by the Charter of the UN and international law, adhere to the direction of dialogue and consultation, and make practical efforts to maintain peace and stability in the Red Sea and the Middle East region, Zhang said.
The US carried out further strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen on Friday night a day after launching a coordinated multi-nation attack on nearly 30 Houthi locations.
Is China hatching a sinister plot regarding the Israel-Gaza war?

Gaza Strip. © MOHAMMED ABED / AFP
By Timur Fomenko | RT | January 13, 2024
A recent Foreign Affairs article purports to expose “China’s game in Gaza,” accusing Beijing of “Exploiting Israel’s War to Win Over the Global South.”
The author alleges that “in calling for a two-state solution, refusing to condemn Hamas, and making symbolic efforts to support a ceasefire, [China] has taken advantage of global anti-Israeli sentiment in a bid to elevate its own standing in the Global South.”
This argument is interesting, because it is premised on the logic that the war on Gaza can end quickly if Beijing simply supports the US position, which the article claims is “to reconcile public support for Israel with private pressure to more carefully target its attacks in Gaza and to be more open to a political settlement with the Palestinians.” So let’s get this right, it’s the US that wants to end this conflict fairly and China is exacerbating it and therefore is at fault?
This kind of analysis is farfetched at best and outright dishonest at worst, and overall an insult to every observer’s intelligence. It really shows the lengths to which the mainstream cycle of journalists and think-tankers will go in order to not place any blame on Israel whatsoever, but to scapegoat third parties who do not in fact have a hand in the conflict. China has always taken a neutral position on the Israel-Palestine issue, though it recognizes the State of Palestine’s sovereign existence, and therefore advocates a two-state solution.
However, the situation really doesn’t need China at all in order to ferment an anti-Israeli and anti-US backlash across the Global South. The US and its allies have managed to do that all by themselves. China’s rhetoric on the issue has been inconsequential and certainly hardly provocative.
First of all, the Foreign Affairs article takes the misleading State Department position that the US is some kind of honest broker and mediator in the Israel-Palestine conflict that just wants the two sides to make up and get along. This is an absolute lie. All the US has offered is unconditional, uncritical and blanket support to Israel which Benjamin Netanyahu has calculated allows him to do whatever he wants, effectively consequence-free. Will the US actually sanction Israel? Will the US condemn Israel at the UN? Will the US stop arming Israel? Absolutely not, and he knows this, therefore anything Washington might claim in regards to sparing civilians or talking about a ceasefire is hollow because it is not backed up by any substance. Israel is allowed to do whatever it sees fit, because placing any restraints on it is domestically politically untenable in the US, as well as in allied countries such as the UK.
Therefore, even if it wanted to, how could China possibly end the conflict, let alone be responsible for it? It is the scenes of unprecedented, Western-backed slaughter and carnage in Gaza that are provoking outrage in the Global South, and the reality that Israel is a law unto itself. This backlash is entirely and exclusively Western-generated and there is no conspiracy nor agenda by China as a neutral player to exploit it. In fact, if China were serious, it would be actively whipping up anti-Israeli sentiment, but it is not doing so because Beijing for the most part is restrained and has little to say on third-party issues.
Rather, China’s alignment with the Global South is a historic trend given Beijing itself is a part of the Global South from the days of its revolutionary heritage, the common experience of colonialism, and therefore the desire to sustain sovereignty and independence from Western domination. This forms a common position with the states of the Middle East, Africa and Latin America on Palestine, with the latter being the most prominent example of Western-led colonial oppression in the world. The situation in Gaza is a Western-backed injustice and set of atrocities, which in turn reveals the double standards of these countries who purport to be the champions of freedom and human rights.
In this case, China doesn’t need to say anything regarding Gaza to inflame the Global South because the situation really is quite self-explanatory. The US is costing itself support throughout the Global South by showing that it is an enabler of genocide through the unconditional political and military backing it grants the Israeli state, yet here in Foreign Affairs we have the lopsided rendition that really it’s just all China’s fault, as usual.
