#3 Ask China: A Chinese Perspective on Middle East Conflict
Amid fragile transitions marked by ceasefire efforts and shifting alliances, China’s engagement focuses on dialogue, development, and multilateral cooperation in pursuit of lasting stability.
Welcome to the 58th edition of our newsletter! I’m SUN Chenghao, a fellow with the Center for International Security and Strategy (CISS) at Tsinghua University, Council Member of The Chinese Association of American Studies, a visiting scholar at Paul Tsai China Center of Yale Law School in 2024 and Munich Young Leaders 2025.
ChinAffairsplus is a newsletter that shares articles by Chinese academics on topics such as China’s foreign policy, China-U.S. relations, China-Europe relations, and more. This newsletter was co-founded by my research assistant, ZHANG Xueyu, and me. Through carefully selected Chinese academic articles, we aim to provide you with key insights into the issues that China’s academic and strategic communities are focused on. We will highlight why each article matters and the most important takeaways. Questions and feedback can be addressed to sch0625@gmail.com.
In this newsletter, we introduce a new section “Ask China” to address concerns about China’s positions through a Q&A format, while also presenting key points of leading Chinese scholars’ commentaries. Through this new series, we aim to provide policymakers, think tanks, and strategic communities overseas with access to Chinese scholars’ views, accompanied by curated academic perspectives that help readers better understand the considerations underlying China’s foreign policy choices.
Background
The Middle East is undergoing a fragile transition following the latest ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas in October 2025. Although the truce brought a temporary pause to hostilities, deep political mistrust and regional rivalries continue to challenge prospects for lasting peace. The conflict has not only devastated Gaza but also reshaped the regional balance, with the “axis of resistance” weakened and Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar recalibrating their diplomatic and security strategies. At the same time, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza has underscored the region’s chronic “development deficit,” where prolonged instability has hindered economic recovery and governance reform. Beyond the immediate conflict, the Middle East is also experiencing broader structural changes: growing participation in multilateral mechanisms such as the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) reflects regional efforts to strengthen strategic autonomy and expand South–South cooperation.
Against this evolving backdrop, Ask China this month addresses three key questions: How can China promote multilateral mediation and work with regional and international partners to advance Middle East peace? Can China’s Global Development Initiative provide governance and development models relevant to the region’s reconstruction and stability? How does China view the strategic significance of the Middle East joining BRICS and the SCO?By exploring those questions, we try to bring together leading Chinese scholars’ perspectives, from analyses of military realignments and the challenges of post-war governance to reflections on multilateral cooperation and the future of regional order, to provide a clearer picture of how China observes and interprets the Middle East’s evolving landscape.
Ask China
Chinese scholars note that one key reason a ceasefire is hard to achieve is the imbalance of power: the “resistance axis” has been weakened and lost bargaining chips, which makes it more likely to turn radical and prolong the conflict. This shows that bilateral pressure alone will not work. China calls for using multilateral platforms to expand mediation space, promote ceasefire, protect civilians, and build dialogue channels. In the context of repeated U.S. vetoes of ceasefire resolutions in the UN Security Council, China stresses cooperation with the Arab League, the OIC, and the EU to propose joint initiatives, in order to broaden consensus, increase legitimacy, and create conditions for political talks.
Chinese scholars point out that the root cause of Gaza’s humanitarian crisis and governance dilemma is a development deficit. Behind security problems lies long-term economic and social stagnation. In this context, the GDI offers a development-first model: meeting livelihood and infrastructure needs first, then promoting social stability. This contrasts with Western aid that often carries political conditions and can help reduce governance risks in the region. Through the BRICS New Development Bank, local currency settlement, and regional funds, China can provide financing and experience for Middle East reconstruction, lowering the risk of conflict recurrence.
Chinese scholars note that the Middle East has become a crucial part of the Global South, carrying both historical depth and contemporary importance. Over a long history marked by colonialism and imperial domination, countries in the region developed a shared political tradition centered on independence, national revival, and the pursuit of justice. Through their struggles for sovereignty, Middle Eastern nations emerged as vital members of the Third World and the wider Global South.
In recent years, regional states have displayed a growing sense of strategic autonomy and enthusiasm for multilateral cooperation by joining the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the BRICS grouping. Iran is now a full SCO member, while Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Egypt have joined BRICS, signaling their intention to seek a more balanced international position.
This collective participation demonstrates the diplomatic confidence of Middle Eastern countries and enhances the visibility and influence of the Global South. It also suggests that the region is no longer merely a front line of conflict, but a dynamic pillar of South–South cooperation. These platforms offer Middle Eastern states new economic and security options, reduce dependence on any single great power, and strengthen their strategic autonomy.
From a Chinese perspective, such engagement not only promotes collaboration among developing countries but also helps link regional security and development concerns to a broader global agenda, creating new anchors for inclusive multilateral governance. In this sense, the Middle East’s role in BRICS and the SCO is not that of a passive participant but of an active contributor to the reshaping of global governance, marking a broader shift of developing nations from recipients of the world order to its co-architects.
China Scholars’ Insights
LIU Zhongmin: Long-Term Occupation of Gaza: Israel’s Dilemma and an Intractable Endgame
Military Goals Unmet
Israel’s plan to fully occupy Gaza reveals a profound strategic dilemma rather than a solution. Despite overwhelming military superiority, the three declared objectives remain far from realized: hostages are still held by Hamas, the organization has been weakened but not eradicated, and Gaza continues to pose a direct security threat. The ongoing siege has devastated civilian life and created a catastrophic humanitarian crisis, turning Gaza into a symbol of destruction without yielding sustainable security for Israel.
Domestic and International Backlash
Inside Israel, anger and frustration are rising. Families of hostages and tens of thousands of protesters openly challenge government policies, exposing deep domestic divisions and a loss of confidence in leadership. Internationally, the Gaza conflict has triggered a collapse in Israel’s legitimacy. France has officially recognized Palestine, while the United Kingdom (UK), Canada, and other Western countries prepare to follow. The humanitarian disaster has made Israel appear isolated, raising the possibility that even long-standing allies in the West will distance themselves diplomatically.
Gaza Governance Trap
The central difficulty lies in the post-war governance of Gaza. The international consensus, including Arab states and Western partners, is to transfer control of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority (PA), thereby uniting it with the West Bank and laying the foundation for statehood. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly rejects this arrangement, fearing that it will empower the PA and accelerate Palestinian independence. Instead, he advocates long-term occupation to maintain Palestinian division. Yet Israel’s 1967–2005 occupation failed to impose stability, instead fostering resistance movements and eventually giving rise to Hamas itself. Repeating this path would deepen insecurity and invite further unrest.
The Two-State Imperative
Occupation cannot deliver lasting peace. By obstructing Palestinian reconciliation and undermining international consensus, Israel perpetuates conflict and undermines prospects for stability. The two-state solution remains the only viable framework. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) has abandoned armed struggle and formally recognized Israel’s right to exist, demonstrating the potential for compromise. However, both Israel and Hamas refuse to embrace this path, perpetuating a cycle of tragedy that worsens with every new round of violence.
LIU Zhongmin: The Middle East in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS: A Key Component of the “Global South”
Historical Roots of Autonomy
The Middle East has long embodied the political foundation of the Global South. Its history of colonization, anti-imperialist struggles, and efforts toward modernization created a strong tradition of autonomy. From the Ottoman Empire’s reforms to nationalist independence movements, regional actors pursued sovereignty under immense external pressure. Participation in the Bandung Conference, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Group of 77 (G77), and the 1973 oil embargo underscored a collective demand for justice and a fairer international order.
Strategic Relevance Today
In the present era, the Middle East is central to the expansion of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS). Iran has joined the SCO as a full member, while Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt, and others entered BRICS in 2023. This shift demonstrates the region’s rising geopolitical weight and its ability to shape multipolar dynamics. Strategic autonomy is also growing: Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the UAE increasingly act on independent calculations, refusing to fully align with United States (U.S.) demands on Russia, sanctions, or oil supply. The China-brokered Saudi–Iran reconciliation highlights the region’s new role as a mediator in regional and even global disputes.
Development and Global Cooperation
Economic diversification has become a pressing strategic mission. After the failures of neoliberal reform and the turmoil of the Arab Spring, many states now prioritize long-term development strategies to reduce reliance on oil and gas. By joining BRICS, Middle Eastern countries secure stronger platforms to influence global governance, advance South–South cooperation, and amplify the collective voice of developing nations. Their immense energy resources, combined with new economic visions, give them leverage and responsibility in shaping global outcomes.
Contradictions and Prospects
Internal contradictions persist. Independence and dependency coexist, as external powers continue to wield influence. Security often outweighs development, leaving the region vulnerable to recurrent instability. Deep divisions among states weaken collective action. Yet despite these challenges, the Middle East remains an indispensable pillar of the Global South. Its historical trajectory, growing strategic autonomy, and integration into new multilateral platforms make it essential to strengthen representation for developing nations and advancing reform of global governance.
SUN Degang: Could Pakistan Provide a Nuclear Umbrella for Saudi Arabia? Will the Middle East Strengthen Its Military Cooperation with China?
The “Nuclear Umbrella” Is More Political Imagination Than Realistic Possibility
The recent Saudi–Pakistani defense agreement sparked talk of a “nuclear umbrella.” Sun Degang argues that although Pakistan is the only nuclear state in the Islamic world, it is almost impossible for it to provide nuclear protection to Saudi Arabia. Establishing such an umbrella would involve nuclear deployment, transfer of strike authority, and highly sensitive political arrangements. It would also face technical and geographical barriers while directly challenging U.S. core interests. Thus, the “nuclear umbrella” is largely an anxious projection rather than the essence of the agreement.
Saudi Security Diversification Reflects Declining U.S. Credibility
The true meaning of the agreement lies in its political signaling, reflecting a shift in regional security thinking. By working with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia shows that after Israel’s attack on Qatar and waning U.S. credibility, Arab states are no longer willing to entrust their fate entirely to Washington. Diversified partnerships both enhance Saudi security and pressure the United States.
An Arab Military Alliance Remains Unlikely Despite Frequent Debate
Although much attention has been given to the possibility of an Arab military alliance, Sun stresses that its feasibility remains low. Gulf states have deep divisions over leadership, troop contributions, and strategic priorities. Similar initiatives in the past have largely failed. If conflict escalates further, the most likely outcome would be a limited mechanism such as a rapid-reaction force, but the conditions for building a genuine regional military alliance are not yet in place.
Israel’s Hardline Policy Has Unintentionally Strengthened Arab Solidarity
In response to Saudi–Pakistani cooperation, Israel may rely on U.S. diplomatic pressure to divide Arab partners. Yet its hardline stance in Gaza has fueled wider Islamic solidarity. Rather than weakening its opponents, Israel’s hardline policy has deepened confrontation and may accelerate bloc politics in the broader region.
China’s Opportunities in Defense Cooperation and Multilateral Diplomacy Are Growing
While symbolic, such agreements create openings for China. As Middle Eastern states diversify arms procurement and defense ties, Chinese defense products and cooperation gain room. Unlike the U.S., China stresses “cooperative defense” over alliances, making its role more acceptable. Platforms such as the China–Arab Summit further allow Beijing to play an active part in shaping regional security.
WANG Zhen: The Middle East “Axis of Resistance” Has Suffered Severe Setbacks — The “Axis of Resistance” Has Been Severely Weakened by Military Strikes and Sanctions
Wang Zhen points out that Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran—the core of the so-called “Axis of Resistance”—have suffered heavy blows under Israeli and U.S. airstrikes. Iran, constrained by sanctions and domestic difficulties, is unable to provide full support. Personnel losses, disrupted supplies, and financial strain have significantly reduced the axis’s overall strength, leaving its combat capabilities and cohesion in crisis. This shift has not only altered the regional balance of power but also cast long shadows over prospects for a ceasefire and future stability.
Weaker Resistance Forces Complicate Negotiations and Reconciliation
Although some observers believe that weakening resistance groups may favor a ceasefire, Wang stresses the opposite. Power imbalances often complicate negotiations. In a weakened position, the Axis of Resistance lacks bargaining leverage and may resort to more radical strategies to maintain its relevance and support, thus prolonging the conflict.
U.S. and Israeli Policies Have Further Intensified the Cycle of Confrontation
Wang argues that the United States’ unwavering support and Israel’s hardline policies have not only weakened the resistance axis but also deepened regional divisions. Arab states are forced to balance between moral commitments and political realities. This dilemma hinders international mediation and has repeatedly undermined ceasefire resolutions at the UN Security Council. Washington’s vetoes, in particular, highlight its one-sided approach to Middle East policy.
The Regional Security Landscape Is Undergoing Structural Change
The weakening of the Axis of Resistance does not signal stability but rather a fragile new equilibrium. Iran’s strategic pressure, the survival challenges facing Hamas and Hezbollah, and Israel’s offensive posture together push the region into a new phase of uncertainty. Regional tensions are sharpening, making ceasefire and reconciliation increasingly elusive. Wang warns that the future may see frequent localized conflicts without the emergence of a comprehensive peace. For the international community, the greatest challenge lies in advancing genuine political solutions under conditions of power asymmetry.
Conclusion
Chinese scholars believe that peace in the Middle East cannot be achieved through force or external pressure, but must be built on dialogue, development, and regional autonomy. China upholds multilateral cooperation and the idea of “peace through development,” working with the Arab League, the OIC, the EU, as well as BRICS and the SCO, to promote ceasefire, humanitarian aid, and reconstruction. Within the Global South framework, China seeks to advance security and development together, striving for a just, inclusive, and sustainable order of peace.
