China’s New Plan for Israel-Palestine

China recently proposed a new four-point plan to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Is this a major departure along a new track that challenges US hegemony and European passivity? Or is China simply pursuing its own economic interests in the guise of peacemaker?

Historically China portrayed itself as on the side of Palestinians, despite claims of neutrality and non-interventionism. Yet after the end of the Mao era and China’s endorsement of an “open door” policy, up to its participation in the Madrid Peace Conference in 1991, Chinese policy toward Israel and Palestine became more aligned with the international community and the status quo. This has been particularly the case since President Xi Jinping’s rise to power in 2013, with Xi taking an active role in proposing plans for peace.

The more proactive Chinese role has been evident in visits between Xi and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas visited China in 2013, and again recently met with the Chinese president in Beijing in July 2017. In 2016, Xi toured the Middle East and in a speech to the Arab League stressed China’s dedication to working toward a solution to the Palestinian question.

During Abbas’ most recent visit, Xi proposed a four-point plan. Similar to the plan that the Chinese president put forth in 2013, it advocates for the two-state solution and calls on both parties to pursue negotiations. It acknowledges Israel’s security concerns regarding a Palestinian state, while also calling on Israel to halt its settlement activities in occupied Palestine. The 2017 document also echoes a 2016 government policy paper stating that China supports a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

China’s economic engagement is undermining Palestinian efforts to change the status quo Share on X

A new element in the 2017 plan is a focus on the economic. The plan calls for “peace through economic development” and offers to facilitate an economic dialogue between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA). This focus serves China’s goal of increasing and securing its projects in the region, evident in its One Belt One Road initiative, which aims to connect China with Europe commercially through maritime and land routes through 68 countries spanning Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.

As Chinese Ambassador to the UN Liu Jieyi stated in July, “China views both Palestine and Israel as important partners in the Belt and Road initiative. China is willing to work under the concept of development for peace in order to promote Palestine and Israel in engaging in mutually beneficial cooperation.” The Chinese state-owned company China National Technical Import and Export Corporation, for instance, is shortlisted to implement the first phase of the Red-Dead water project that includes Israel, the PA, and Jordan.

China’s latest peace initiative thus draws on the same principles and mechanisms of previous international initiatives regarding the conflict, and even bolsters them through its attention to strategies for “economic peace” – currently touted by the US. By engaging economically in joint projects with Palestine and Israel while the political situation remains the same, China is undermining Palestinian efforts to change the status quo and hold Israel accountable for its decades-old regime of settler colonialism and ongoing violations of international law.

Policy recommendations:

  • For China to play an effective leadership role in solving the Palestinian question, it must first bypass previous international initiatives, challenge US dominance over the “peace process,” and endorse mechanisms that challenge the status quo.
  • China must end its investments in Israeli companies complicit in violations of international law, such as kosher food manufacturer Tnuva and cosmetics company Ahava.
  • China and other Asian countries can support Palestine in challenging the Israeli and international agenda. But Palestinians must do more in this regard: They must create influence in those countries by engaging in cultural, academic, and socioeconomic projects.

Until China and Palestine implement such changes, China will not play a leadership role in the conflict, nor will any real shift occur among the international players.

Al-Shabaka Policy Member Zaid Shuaibi is the Arab World and Palestine Coordinator for the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI)....
(2017, September 14)

Latest Analysis

 Politics
The erasure of Indigenous populations lies at the core of settler-colonial narratives. These narratives aim to deny existing geographies, communities, and histories to justify the displacement and replacement of one people by another. The Zionist project is no exception. Among Zionism’s founding myths is the claim that it “made the desert bloom” and that Tel Aviv, its crown jewel, arose from barren sand dunes—an uninhabitable void transformed by pioneering settlers. This framing obscures the fact that the colonial regime initially built Tel Aviv on the outskirts of Yaffa (Jaffa), a thriving Palestinian city with a rich cultural life and a booming orange trade. The “dunes” description projects emptiness and conceals the vibrant agricultural and social life that flourished in the area. By casting the land as uninhabitable until redeemed by settlers, this narrative helped justify dispossession and colonial expansion. This process intensified after 1948, when Tel Aviv absorbed the lands of ethnically cleansed Palestinian villages, including al-Sumayil, Salame, Shaykh Muwannis, and Abu Kabir, and ultimately extended into the city of Yaffa. This same settler-colonial discourse drives the ongoing genocidal war on Gaza, where destruction is reframed through the narrative of “uninhabitability.” Gaza is increasingly depicted as a lifeless ruin—a framing that is far from neutral. This commentary contends that “uninhabitable” is a politically charged term that masks culpability, reproduces colonial erasure, and shapes policy and public perception in ways that profoundly affect Palestinian lives and futures. It examines the origins, function, and implications of this discourse within the logic of settler colonialism, calling for a radical shift in language from narratives that obscure violence to those affirming Palestinian presence, history, and sovereignty.
Abdalrahman Kittana· Aug 27, 2025
 Politics
Since October 2023, Israel’s assault on Gaza has produced one of the most catastrophic humanitarian crises in recent history—an unfolding genocide enabled by world powers and continuing unabated despite the sweeping global solidarity it has sparked. Alongside relentless bombardment and mass displacement, the Israeli regime is waging a deliberate campaign of starvation. In response to this Israeli-manufactured catastrophe, several European states have begun recognizing or signaling their intent to recognize the State of Palestine. Most recently, France announced its intention to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. The UK has stated it will follow suit unless Israel abides by a ceasefire and recommits to a two-state solution. The recent wave of symbolic recognitions that began in 2024 now appears to be the only step many European powers are willing to take in the face of genocide, following nearly two years of moral, material, and diplomatic support for the Israeli regime as well as near-total impunity. This roundtable conversation with Al Shabaka policy analysts Diana Buttu, Inès Abdel Razek, and Al Shabaka’s co-director, Yara Hawari, asks: Why now? What political or strategic interests are driving this wave of recognition? And what does it mean to recognize a Palestinian state, on paper, while leaving intact the structures of occupation, apartheid, and the genocidal regime that sustains them?
 Politics
In March, Israel shattered the ceasefire in Gaza by resuming its bombing campaign at full force and enforcing a total blockade on humanitarian aid—ushering in a new phase of the ongoing genocide. In response to mounting international criticism, the Israeli regime introduced a tightly controlled aid scheme designed not to alleviate suffering, but to obscure its use of starvation as a weapon of collective punishment. Through the so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), Israel has transformed humanitarian aid into a tool of control, coercion, and forced displacement. Israeli forces have additionally blocked UN and other aid agencies from accessing over 400 distribution points they once operated throughout Gaza. They consequently forced two million Palestinians to rely on just four GHF sites, most near its southern border in what appears to be a deliberate effort to push mass displacement toward Egypt. Investigations have also revealed how US-based private contractors are actively profiting from the GHF’s deadly operations. In this policy lab, Yara Asi and Alex Feagans join host Tariq Kenney-Shawa to discuss how the GHF fits into Israel’s genocidal strategy—and to expose the network of individuals and companies profiting from what has been a death trap masquerading as humanitarian assistance.
Skip to content