Pause in fighting not the way to ensure civilians live in safety, dignity and peace: China Daily editorial

For most people in a rational frame of mind, a cease-fire is imperative to bring an end to the slaughter in Gaza.

The foreign ministers of the G7 countries and the high representative of the European Union think otherwise. They have instead called for “pauses” in the fighting to facilitate urgently needed humanitarian assistance.

That might seem to some to be quibbling over words. But a cease-fire is a cessation in the fighting with the intention of bringing a permanent end to the hostilities. A pause is a brief interruption of an action, which then continues.

So it is disingenuous for the G7 foreign ministers and the EU representative to then say that they are committed to a broader peace process and sustainable long-term solution.

To be fair, they do admit that the rise in violence by extremist Israeli settlers in the West Bank against Palestinians threatens the prospects for a lasting peace and say it “is unacceptable”. They also acknowledge that a two-state solution, which envisions Israel and a viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace, security, and mutual recognition, “remains the only path to a just, lasting, and secure peace”.

But they pointedly do not call for a cease-fire.

Now they are even seemingly trying to lay the blame for the humanitarian crisis at China’s door.

In her speech during the European Union Ambassadors Conference 2023 on Monday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen mentioned China 21 times and said that “every measure of influence that Beijing has on Hamas and on Iran needs to be used to prevent further escalation”.

In fact, China has been steadfastly striving to secure a binding international consensus on concrete steps to de-escalate hostilities and secure a cease-fire. Its position is clear. It calls for ending the fighting as soon as possible, protecting civilians, and realizing the peaceful coexistence of Palestine and Israel based on the two-state solution as soon as possible.

The two-state solution may not be considered ideal by some on either side. But it is the only way for the two sides to break the long cycle of violence that has resulted in nothing but bloodshed and suffering and the breeding of mutual hatred.

This is not “a” solution to be dictated by Washington but rather “the” two-state solution agreed in previous negotiations between the two sides under the framework of United Nations resolutions.

The statement issued after the G7 foreign ministers’ meeting in Tokyo on Wednesday is like the crocodile tears US officials have shed for the children killed in Ukraine while demonstrating a callous indifference to those being killed in Gaza.

Having called for “humanitarian pauses” instead of a “cease-fire”, it is clear that the other G7 members lack the collective will to cut the apron strings with Washington.