In late July, 14 Palestinian political factions, most notably including Hamas and Fatah, signed the ‘Beijing Declaration on Ending Division and Strengthening Palestinian National Unity’ in the People’s Republic of China. The core of the declaration rests on a ‘three-step initiative’ for resolving the Palestinian question. The PRC pushed for a sustainable ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, followed by the creation of a post-conflict ‘self-governing’ interim regime. The ultimate objective is to secure Palestine’s admission to the UN, in support of the two-state solution.
Although Wang Yi, the PRC’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, deemed the event a “vital historical moment” in the Palestinian liberation enterprise, most analysts emphasise the substantial difficulties in implementing the declaration, including the deep-seated enmity between Palestinian factions and Western opposition to Hamas’ involvement in governance. The issue does not stem from the PRC’s role in facilitating the discussions but from the bloody history between the major political forces in Palestine.
Challenges in Resolving the Palestine Question
Hamas won a majority in the Palestinian parliamentary election in 2006, resulting in an armed conflict between Hamas and Fatah, with the latter holding the Palestine Authority’s presidency. The Fatah retained control over the West Bank, while Hamas centred on governing Gaza. There are multiple attempts for the two Parties to reconcile, yet the process has proven to be difficult, with numerous failed agreements on record.
Take negotiations for further elections for instance. In 2009, Hamas and Fatah agreed on the necessity of holding a general election by early 2010. However, when the designated time arrived, Fatah called off the election. Similar scenarios occurred in 2014 and 2021. While Chinese experts attempted to argue for the 2024 Declaration’s historical significance, they nonetheless admitted that the Beijing Declaration could only be regarded as the best starting point for future reconciliation.
Nevertheless, the signing of the declaration was momentous for the PRC. The exchange consolidated the country’s position as a ‘responsible great power’ that could mediate warring parties. China’s foreign policy rhetoric laid out a clear map illuminating what the country seeks to offer.
The „China Solution” to Security
The Chinese approach to the Palestinian issue is aligned with the direction plotted by its 2023 Global Security Initiative (GSI). In the document, the PRC pledged to abide by UN charters and international norms while facilitating ‘positive interaction’ between major powers. A strong advocate for safeguarding sovereignty and autonomy on the global stage, Beijing hopes to empower states to deal with domestic and regional issues on their own terms. To resolve global and regional conflicts, the PRC recommended strengthening security frameworks in ASEAN, the Middle East and Africa; inviting local actors to advance self-governance.
This line, nonetheless, needs to be read with the PRC’s disillusioned view of the US. When interpreting the GSI, authorities in Beijing remarked that freedom should not be ‘dictated by certain countries’ on the global stage, criticising those who uphold ‘hegemonism’ and engage in ‘great power politics.’ A commentary from state media Xinhua provides a more apparent display of whom Beijing is referring to. Xinhua contends that the US has been attempting to ‘demonise’ values, cultures and systems upheld by non-Western countries. The ‘true nature’ behind ‘American democracy and freedom’ lies in an imperialist project that ‘limits [global] diversity.’
Meanwhile, the PRC regards itself as the guardian of ‘real multilateralism,’ especially as an advocate that backs the interest of the ‘Global South.’ The Chinese International Cooperation Centre deems the loosely defined ‘Global South’ as an ‘independent’ group that refuses to take sides, centering on advancing global cooperation to close South-North developmental gaps. The PRC’s effort to act as an advocate for the underrepresented underpins its oratory response to the Palestinian issue. PRC spokeswoman Mao Ning, for instance, contends that there are no ‘selfish considerations’ behind the PRC’s action in helping with Palestinian reconciliation. Beijing’s only objective, according to Mao, is to restore Palestinian’s rightful power on their land.
Shifting Dynamics
The signing of the Declaration, therefore, is not solely directed towards resolving the Palestinian issue. The PRC’s effort also helped the country gain international recognition. Not only did more friendly countries, including those in ASEAN and the Arab League, endorse the PRC’s contribution, but Josep Borrell, the Vice-President of the European Commission, also welcomed the reconciliation process. While Borrell did not directly praise Beijing, his affirmation of the agreement shows the growing influence the PRC’s actions have on the global stage.
The Beijing Declaration is not the first time the PRC has succeeded in mediating conflicts where ‘the West’ has failed to do so. Previously, the PRC brokered a deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran, resulting in their normalisation of diplomatic relations. The country’s historical experience of countering imperialism and outgrowing poverty fuelled its growing clout. More and more, developed countries are being confronted with suspicion owing to previous strategic mismanagement. In the face of the prowess of rising powers, it may be best to readjust approaches for rebuilding trust and fostering cooperation.
Image: Munich Security Conference/Kleinschmidt
No image changes made.
Comments