80% of Palestinians welcome Chinese offer to mediate with Israel, US seen as least favorite option

Following Beijing’s success in brokering the Saudi-Iranian diplomatic agreement in March, a sweeping 80 percent of the survey respondents supported a Chinese role in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. (AFP/File Photo)
Short Url
Updated 16 May 2023
Follow

80% of Palestinians welcome Chinese offer to mediate with Israel, US seen as least favorite option

  • Survey conducted for Arab News by YouGov finds EU and China behind Russia as potential effective mediators
  • Almost 60 percent of respondents said they did not trust the US to mediate Palestinian-Israeli negotiations

LONDON: Majority of Palestinians view China and Russia as potentially effective mediators for their peace talks with the state of Israel, a recent survey revealed.

The survey, conducted by YouGov in May at the request of Arab News, showed that Palestinians’ most preferred potential peace broker was Russia, followed closely by the European Union and China, while the US proved far from popular among the residents of the West Bank and Gaza.

Commenting on the results of the survey on the preferences of Palestinians, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova concluded: “Because Russia has not betrayed those who pinned their hopes on it.”

The Information and Press Department (IPD) of the Russian Foreign Ministry said: “Moscow, as it stated in IPD’s comment to Arab News, continues to believe that the existing international legal framework, the Arab peace initiative in Al-Taif and the groundwork that has been achieved between Israelis and Palestinians throughout the negotiation process on the basis of (a) two-state solution can serve as a foundation for resuming direct negotiations between the parties to the conflict.”

“Our position is clear, unchangeable and not subject to political conjuncture,” the IPD added. “We are constantly talking about this to our Palestinian friends and the Israeli side as well.”

In October last year, the Palestinian Authority told Russian President Vladimir Putin people in Palestine may consider US mediation only if it is part of the Quartet, a foursome of nations that includes Russia.

Following Beijing’s success in brokering the Saudi-Iranian diplomatic agreement in March, a sweeping 80 percent of the survey respondents, who expressed a clear opinion on the topic, supported a Chinese role in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

In December, President Xi Jinping expressed during an official visit to Riyadh his country’s keenness to help resolve the conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran. This led to five days of intense talks in March in Beijing, delivering an agreement that entails a respect of sovereignty of regional countries, the restoration of diplomatic ties, and the revival of previously agreed bilateral treaties between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

In the wake of this success, China offered in April, amid rising tension in Jerusalem, to facilitate peace talks between Israel and Palestine, urging their resumption as soon as possible.

Contrary to the stance on China, almost 60 percent of participants did not trust the US to mediate Palestinian-Israeli negotiations despite that – or perhaps because – 86 percent believed the US had significant influence over Israel.

“Palestinians have never seen the US as a neutral or fair broker,” said director of the London-based Council for Arab-British Understanding (CAABU), Chris Doyle, adding that “the (Palestinian) leadership has tolerated the US because, quite simply, as the world’s sole superpower for many years, (they) have had no choice.”

He told Arab News that “there are many, many reasons why Palestinians – including the leadership – have never viewed the US as that responsible broker.”

“The US overtly states that it is pro-Israel, that it has a strategic alliance with the State of Israel, it routinely passes pro-Israel resolutions in Congress, and, of course, vetoes attempts to pass Security Council resolutions critical of the State of Israel and its conduct,” Doyle explained.

He pointed out that the “the US position in the region is clearly declining,” explaining that “in part, this is because of the decisions of successive presidents going back to the Obama administration to pivot to Asia, to have less to do with the Middle East, and to try to avoid getting sucked into protracted conflicts.

“We are seeing, therefore, less and less US mediation efforts in the region and involvement. It is still there – it is not a non-actor, but it is not there in the way that it once used to be. Not in the way, for example, under the Clinton administration, or when John Kerry was doing his very energetic diplomacy a decade ago.”

And while the EU was the respondents’ second preferred mediator among the five suggested major powers – the US, EU, Japan, and China alongside Russia, Doyle said “the problem with the EU is that it is increasingly divided, with a lot of Central and Eastern European countries increasingly moving away from the international consensus that had existed since 1980.”

“You have a core group of largely Western European states who do adopt sensible positions based in international national law,” he continued, “So the idea of the EU as a mediator right now seems rather far-fetched because it simply does not have the sort of unity which would allow it to play out that role.”

Doyle highlighted that the EU “has to have the political courage to act in this fashion and to ignore any pressures that the US and Israel would apply to the European Union – and as yet, there has been not enough political will involved.”

A better mediation model, according to Doyle, would be to “do it through the United Nations, with the involvement of major powers, including the US, who would be the guarantors of any agreement that came out of that sort of process.”

Some survey respondents also blamed US bias towards Israel for the recurring failure of peace talks. Doyle underscored that “the idea that the US can be the sole loan broker for a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians” was “simply not credible anymore. Not to those on the outside, but above all to Palestinians.”

 


Gaza ceasefire enters phase two despite unresolved issues

Updated 16 January 2026
Follow

Gaza ceasefire enters phase two despite unresolved issues

  • Under the second phase, Gaza is to be administered by a 15-member Palestinian technocratic committee operating under the supervision of a so-called “Board of Peace,” to be chaired by Trump

JERUSALEM: A US-backed plan to end the war in Gaza has entered its second phase despite unresolved disputes between Israel and Hamas over alleged ceasefire violations and issues unaddressed in the first stage.
The most contentious questions remain Hamas’s refusal to publicly commit to full disarmament, a non-negotiable demand from Israel, and Israel’s lack of clarity over whether it will fully withdraw its forces from Gaza.
The creation of a Palestinian technocratic committee, announced on Wednesday, is intended to manage day-to-day governance in post-war Gaza, but it leaves unresolved broader political and security questions.
Below is a breakdown of developments from phase one to the newly launched second stage.

Gains and gaps in phase one

The first phase of the plan, part of a 20-point proposal unveiled by US President Donald Trump, began on October 10 and aimed primarily to stop the fighting in the Gaza Strip, allow in aid and secure the return of all remaining living and deceased hostages held by Hamas and allied Palestinian militant groups.
All hostages have since been returned, except for the remains of one Israeli, Ran Gvili.
Israel has accused Hamas of delaying the handover of Gvili’s body, while Hamas has said widespread destruction in Gaza made locating the remains difficult.
Gvili’s family had urged mediators to delay the transition to phase two.
“Moving on breaks my heart. Have we given up? Ran did not give up on anyone,” his sister, Shira Gvili, said after mediators announced the move.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said efforts to recover Gvili’s remains would continue but has not publicly commented on the launch of phase two.
Hamas has accused Israel of repeated ceasefire violations, including air strikes, firing on civilians and advancing the so-called “Yellow Line,” an informal boundary separating areas under Israeli military control from those under Hamas authority.
Gaza’s Hamas-run health ministry said Israeli forces had killed 451 people since the ceasefire took effect.
Israel’s military said it had targeted suspected militants who crossed into restricted zones near the Yellow Line, adding that three Israeli soldiers were also killed by militants during the same period.
Aid agencies say Israel has not allowed the volume of humanitarian assistance envisaged under phase one, a claim Israel rejects.
Gaza, whose borders and access points remain under Israeli control, continues to face severe shortages of food, clean water, medicine and fuel.
Israel and the United Nations have repeatedly disputed figures on the number of aid trucks permitted to enter the Palestinian territory.

Disarmament, governance in phase two

Under the second phase, Gaza is to be administered by a 15-member Palestinian technocratic committee operating under the supervision of a so-called “Board of Peace,” to be chaired by Trump.
“The ball is now in the court of the mediators, the American guarantor and the international community to empower the committee,” Bassem Naim, a senior Hamas leader, said in a statement on Thursday.
Trump on Thursday announced the board of peace had been formed and its members would be announced “shortly.”
Mediators Egypt, Turkiye and Qatar said Ali Shaath, a former deputy minister in the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority, had been appointed to lead the committee.
Later on Thursday, Egyptian state television reported that all members of the committee had “arrived in Egypt and begun their meetings in preparation for entering the territory.”
Al-Qahera News, which is close to Egypt’s state intelligence services, said the members’ arrival followed US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff’s announcement on Wednesday “of the start of the second phase and what was agreed upon at the meeting of Palestinian factions in Cairo yesterday.”
Shaath, in a recent interview, said the committee would rely on “brains rather than weapons” and would not coordinate with armed groups.
On Wednesday, Witkoff said phase two aims for the “full demilitarization and reconstruction of Gaza,” including the disarmament of all unauthorized armed factions.
Witkoff said Washington expected Hamas to fulfil its remaining obligations, including the return of Gvili’s body, warning that failure to do so would bring “serious consequences.”
The plan also calls for the deployment of an International Stabilization Force to help secure Gaza and train vetted Palestinian police units.
For Palestinians, the central issue remains Israel’s full military withdrawal from Gaza — a step included in the framework but for which no detailed timetable has been announced.
With fundamental disagreements persisting over disarmament, withdrawal and governance, diplomats say the success of phase two will depend on sustained pressure from mediators and whether both sides are willing — or able — to move beyond long-standing red lines.