Westerners often ask, "If China supports Palestine, why not sanction 'Israel'?" For the most part, this is a fundamental misunderstanding of the PRC's foreign policy.
This is such a cope. It ignores (1) Israel's increased restrictions in the past decade on Chinese investment (especially from SOEs) in sensitive areas like tech and infrastructure, and (2) American pressure on Israel to reject Chinese FDI in those same sectors (Haifa port, desalination plant, Tel Aviv light rail). If China had its way, Chinese FDI in Israel would be higher than it is.
You write that "China does not sanction entire countries; typically, sanctions will only be placed upon individuals (e.g., foreign government officials or lawmakers), organizations (e.g., think tanks or NGOs), or companies (e.g., defense contractors selling to “Taiwan independence” separatist forces and refusing to uphold the One China principle)." So where are the sanctions on Israeli individuals, organizations, or companies? I'm talking about sanctions that aren't motivated by China's own national security concerns, but by solidarity with Palestinians.
You write: "In the case of “Israel,” China has “restricted economic activities in small, extremely high-risk areas” in line with international law." Read the press release you cite. These restrictions are just on the Gaza border, which is obviously about the dangers of operating next to Gaza, not about "international law."
You cite China's principle of "mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity" for its but under international law, this would not extend to areas outside of the 1967 borders. What's stopping them from imposing sanctions West Bank settlements in the name of "respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity"?
China just doesn't care about Palestinians. It's not doing some 3D chess move.
China refuses to label Hamas, Hezbollah, or the IRGC as terrorist organizations; frames the conflict as stemming from "Israel’s" occupation, not October 7; defends Palestinian self‑determination at the International Court of Justice; supports Palestinian statehood at the UN; and maintains strong ties with Iran and other resistance‑aligned states. China has instructed domestic firms to stop using software from "Israeli" companies such as Check Point Software Technologies, CyberArk, Orca Security, Cato Networks, and Imperva. This support has been consistent, legalistic, and diplomatic. Hardly performative.
The idea that China would sanction an entire country (for any reason) is purely a Western fantasy. As I said, China closely adheres to UNGA resolutions, hence its recognition of the so-called "State of Israel" and its support for the "two-state solution." Whether this is correct or not is a separate question, but in line with Burkina Faso's Thomas Sankara and former Chairman Mao, China remains committed to upholding the UN despite its many flaws.
China's diplomatic moves have been mostly good. It's restrictions on some Israeli firms have been motivated by their own national security interests. There have been no sanctions against Israeli individuals, organizations, or companies just based on the Gaza genocide or any other solidaristic reason.
The idea that this is actually because of some deeply rooted Maoist doctrine is a QAnon-level self-delusion. China was arming the PLO under Mao. Besides conflicts in its own neighborhood (Vietnam, Korea, early Khmer Rouge support) or across SE Asia (supporting armed communist groups in Indonesia, Philippines, etc.) China was supporting armed movements in Algeria, Congo, Angola (taking some of the weight off US taxpayers by supporting UNITA), Tanzania, Rhodesia/Zimbabwe, and probably others I don't know about. China in the 60s-70s would have had a much stronger claim to being , as you put it, a developing country trying to build socialism in one country. You use a lot of spicy Maoist rhetoric in the piece, but Mao never built a port in Ashdod.
Imagine one person who takes a cynical view of China as a somewhat counter-hegemonic rival capitalist power, and another person takes the naive view that China under Xi is playing 3D socialist chess against the imperialist dogs. Who would be more surprised by China's role in building Belt & Road projects like the Haifa port, Ashdod port, Red-Med rail, Eilat tunnel port?
China supports the Palestinian people’s right to statehood while continuing to treat Israel as a sovereign state with which diplomatic and economic relations must be maintained. China’s policy is shaped by its position on international law, the pursuit of stability in the Middle East, commercial interests, and great-power strategy—not by revolutionary solidarity alone.
It’s true China has other interests, such as national development and the pursuit of people-to-people dialogue and win-win cooperation with all recognized states. These are covered widely in mainstream analyses.
My stance on this matter is that Palestine does not need some third party, whether a Westerner-led flotilla or another nation, to achieve national liberation. An egg cracked from the outside is food; cracked from the inside is new life. Ultimately, China, Russia, and other states that support the Palestinian struggle will continue to do so no matter what.
Overall this is a good post, but I think it's still worth remembering that we'd be in a much better position if China actually took a hardline, Iranian style anti-zionist position. Their current position of recognition of israel while still supporting Iran/Palestine was taken as a concession to western power in the 90s. There can perhaps be an argument over whether this move was ultimately worth it or not, as it likely helped China's economic position, but it's obviously still a concession and a bad move when taken in isolation.
China's state firms are heavily nvested in the Settler-Colony, helping it develop its commercial infrastructure (even in West Bank) that keeps the Settler-Colony functioning.
There's no need for China to sanction; China could have systematically, atleast, suspended all commercial activities until the genoc!de was accounted for.
China's aide to Palestine is also a pittance to the amount of trade Chona is doing with the Settler-Colony and China's economy.
China is proving that China's principle stance is that of self-serving interest. It isn't that Working-Class Revolutionary Republic, one could look upto for aide, support and learning.
China doesn't believe in sanctions because they objectively do not work, except to punish ordinary people who had no part in making governmental decisions. If sanctions DID work, Cuba would have been capitalist by 1965 and Russia would have collapsed.
Plus China will always be China and put China's national interests first. It would have done the same thing if the Nationalists had won the Civil War.
But coming out and saying that is a bad look to many(not me--I'm fine with it), so you and others come out with what Thersitism correctly calls a cope. If you're not careful, it can become a rabbit hole.
This is such a cope. It ignores (1) Israel's increased restrictions in the past decade on Chinese investment (especially from SOEs) in sensitive areas like tech and infrastructure, and (2) American pressure on Israel to reject Chinese FDI in those same sectors (Haifa port, desalination plant, Tel Aviv light rail). If China had its way, Chinese FDI in Israel would be higher than it is.
You write that "China does not sanction entire countries; typically, sanctions will only be placed upon individuals (e.g., foreign government officials or lawmakers), organizations (e.g., think tanks or NGOs), or companies (e.g., defense contractors selling to “Taiwan independence” separatist forces and refusing to uphold the One China principle)." So where are the sanctions on Israeli individuals, organizations, or companies? I'm talking about sanctions that aren't motivated by China's own national security concerns, but by solidarity with Palestinians.
You write: "In the case of “Israel,” China has “restricted economic activities in small, extremely high-risk areas” in line with international law." Read the press release you cite. These restrictions are just on the Gaza border, which is obviously about the dangers of operating next to Gaza, not about "international law."
You cite China's principle of "mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity" for its but under international law, this would not extend to areas outside of the 1967 borders. What's stopping them from imposing sanctions West Bank settlements in the name of "respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity"?
China just doesn't care about Palestinians. It's not doing some 3D chess move.
China refuses to label Hamas, Hezbollah, or the IRGC as terrorist organizations; frames the conflict as stemming from "Israel’s" occupation, not October 7; defends Palestinian self‑determination at the International Court of Justice; supports Palestinian statehood at the UN; and maintains strong ties with Iran and other resistance‑aligned states. China has instructed domestic firms to stop using software from "Israeli" companies such as Check Point Software Technologies, CyberArk, Orca Security, Cato Networks, and Imperva. This support has been consistent, legalistic, and diplomatic. Hardly performative.
The idea that China would sanction an entire country (for any reason) is purely a Western fantasy. As I said, China closely adheres to UNGA resolutions, hence its recognition of the so-called "State of Israel" and its support for the "two-state solution." Whether this is correct or not is a separate question, but in line with Burkina Faso's Thomas Sankara and former Chairman Mao, China remains committed to upholding the UN despite its many flaws.
China's diplomatic moves have been mostly good. It's restrictions on some Israeli firms have been motivated by their own national security interests. There have been no sanctions against Israeli individuals, organizations, or companies just based on the Gaza genocide or any other solidaristic reason.
The idea that this is actually because of some deeply rooted Maoist doctrine is a QAnon-level self-delusion. China was arming the PLO under Mao. Besides conflicts in its own neighborhood (Vietnam, Korea, early Khmer Rouge support) or across SE Asia (supporting armed communist groups in Indonesia, Philippines, etc.) China was supporting armed movements in Algeria, Congo, Angola (taking some of the weight off US taxpayers by supporting UNITA), Tanzania, Rhodesia/Zimbabwe, and probably others I don't know about. China in the 60s-70s would have had a much stronger claim to being , as you put it, a developing country trying to build socialism in one country. You use a lot of spicy Maoist rhetoric in the piece, but Mao never built a port in Ashdod.
Imagine one person who takes a cynical view of China as a somewhat counter-hegemonic rival capitalist power, and another person takes the naive view that China under Xi is playing 3D socialist chess against the imperialist dogs. Who would be more surprised by China's role in building Belt & Road projects like the Haifa port, Ashdod port, Red-Med rail, Eilat tunnel port?
China supports the Palestinian people’s right to statehood while continuing to treat Israel as a sovereign state with which diplomatic and economic relations must be maintained. China’s policy is shaped by its position on international law, the pursuit of stability in the Middle East, commercial interests, and great-power strategy—not by revolutionary solidarity alone.
It’s true China has other interests, such as national development and the pursuit of people-to-people dialogue and win-win cooperation with all recognized states. These are covered widely in mainstream analyses.
If China wanted to save the Palestinians, it would have saved them. But it didn’t happen.
And how would they save Palestine?
My stance on this matter is that Palestine does not need some third party, whether a Westerner-led flotilla or another nation, to achieve national liberation. An egg cracked from the outside is food; cracked from the inside is new life. Ultimately, China, Russia, and other states that support the Palestinian struggle will continue to do so no matter what.
Palestine, I don’t know. Palestinians they need it for sure, to simply survive.
Since when do White people listen to Chinese people?
Overall this is a good post, but I think it's still worth remembering that we'd be in a much better position if China actually took a hardline, Iranian style anti-zionist position. Their current position of recognition of israel while still supporting Iran/Palestine was taken as a concession to western power in the 90s. There can perhaps be an argument over whether this move was ultimately worth it or not, as it likely helped China's economic position, but it's obviously still a concession and a bad move when taken in isolation.
China's state firms are heavily nvested in the Settler-Colony, helping it develop its commercial infrastructure (even in West Bank) that keeps the Settler-Colony functioning.
There's no need for China to sanction; China could have systematically, atleast, suspended all commercial activities until the genoc!de was accounted for.
China's aide to Palestine is also a pittance to the amount of trade Chona is doing with the Settler-Colony and China's economy.
China is proving that China's principle stance is that of self-serving interest. It isn't that Working-Class Revolutionary Republic, one could look upto for aide, support and learning.
China doesn't believe in sanctions because they objectively do not work, except to punish ordinary people who had no part in making governmental decisions. If sanctions DID work, Cuba would have been capitalist by 1965 and Russia would have collapsed.
Plus China will always be China and put China's national interests first. It would have done the same thing if the Nationalists had won the Civil War.
But coming out and saying that is a bad look to many(not me--I'm fine with it), so you and others come out with what Thersitism correctly calls a cope. If you're not careful, it can become a rabbit hole.