Xi offers to work with other countries to play constructive role in Middle East

Chinese President Xi Jinping has stressed China's readiness to work with other countries to play a constructive role in stabilizing the Middle East. He also expressed worries about Israel's actions in the region.
Xi was speaking with Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev on Tuesday in the Kazakh capital of Astana on the sidelines of a meeting of the leaders of China and five Central Asian countries.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry said Xi expressed deep concerns about Israel's military operation against Iran, which has caused a sudden escalation of tensions in the region.
The ministry said Xi noted that China opposes any actions that infringe upon the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of other countries.
The ministry said Xi called on all related parties to work to prevent tensions in the Middle East from further escalating as soon as possible, and said China is ready to work with them.
At the subsequent China-Central Asia Summit, Xi expressed opposition to hegemonies and power politics, apparently criticizing the tariff policies of the administration of US President Donald Trump.
Xi stressed his intention to promote a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization.
The remarks are seen as an apparent attempt to keep the Group of Seven in check by stressing China's cooperative relations with Central Asian countries, as the G7 summit was being held at around the same time.
They also demonstrate China's stance to counter the United States, with which China has been experiencing some trade friction.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Japan Times

2 hours ago

• Japan Times

Can NATO keep Trump on-message about Russia threat?

When leaders from NATO's 32 countries gather for a summit in The Hague next week, most want to send a clear message: Russia is the main threat to their alliance. But the loudest voice in the room likely won't be on the same page. Since coming back to office, U.S. President Donald Trump has upended the West's approach toward Russia's war on Ukraine by undercutting Kyiv and opening the door to closer ties with Moscow. While the volatile leader has expressed some frustration with Russia's Vladimir Putin for refusing a ceasefire, he has steered clear of punishing the Kremlin. At a Group of Seven summit this week Trump made waves by saying the group of industrialized countries should never have expelled Russia. Ahead of the Hague gathering, diplomats at NATO have been wrangling over a five-paragraph summit statement, with many countries pressing for a full-throated assertion of the menace from Moscow. That, they say, will help explain the main thrust of the meeting: an agreement for countries to ramp up defense spending to satisfy Trump's demand for it to reach 5% of GDP. Since the Kremlin launched its 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the alliance has called Russia "the most significant and direct threat to allies' security and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area." But this time around the United States — backed up by Moscow-friendly Hungary and Slovakia — has been intent on watering that down. Diplomats have been juggling with variants such as referring to "threats, including Russia" or mentioning "the long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security." The verbal nuances may seem slight, but they mean a lot to those countries being asked to massively ramp up spending and those on NATO's eastern flank most threatened by the Kremlin. NATO has warned that Russia could be ready to attack an alliance country within five years. "If we can get Trump to sign off on calling Russia a long-term threat then that would be a good result," a senior European diplomat said. As U.S. peace efforts between Russia and Ukraine have stalled, the diplomat said that Washington appeared to have "moved a centimeter in our direction" on taking a stronger stance on Russia. "Of course more hawkish countries want to go further — but just getting Trump to agree that would still be fine," the diplomat said. Part of the U.S. reasoning is that Washington is more worried about the threat China poses worldwide — and that Russia is more a problem just in Europe. "Russia is the near threat," said U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker. "But China is obviously a big challenge for all of us, and we need to be allied and address those threats as well." Camille Grand of the European Council on Foreign Relations said that beneath the diplomatic fine-tuning, NATO was being confronted by a "fundamental question." "How does the United States view Russia?" he said. "So far we haven't really got an answer." Even if NATO does opt for stronger wording on Moscow, there is always the possibility that Trump could show up in The Hague and directly contradict it. But the debate could come into sharper focus in the months after the summit when the United States could announce a pullback of forces in Europe as part of a review of its global deployments. One area where Washington appears clearly not on board with most other allies is on backing Ukraine. Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy is set to attend on the sidelines of the summit but his involvement is being kept to a minimum to avoid a bust-up with Trump. Diplomats said there should be a reference in the summit statement linking new defense spending to helping Ukraine — but there will be no talk of Kyiv's long-term push to join NATO. "The U.S. does not see Ukrainian security as essential to European security," said Kurt Volker, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO. "Our European allies do, so they feel that if Putin is allowed to prevail in Ukraine, or if Ukraine does not survive as a sovereign, independent state, they are at risk."

The Mainichi

3 hours ago

• The Mainichi

Editorial: Directionless G7 must find its footing after Trump-dominated Canada summit

In an effort to portray unity at all costs, the Group of Seven (G7) advanced industrial nations has failed to deliver a clear message or offer any effective solutions to halt global instability. Standing frozen at this 50th-anniversary milestone, the group's inability to provide meaningful prescriptions highlights its waning influence. The G7 summit took place in Canada, focusing primarily on conflicts in Europe and the Middle East and maintaining the free trade system. Yet it concluded without proposing significant new measures to support Ukraine, nor did it advance meaningful dialogue about the crucial need for free trade. Although a joint statement addressed the Middle East situation, its contents were deeply skewed -- defending Israel, which recently launched attacks on Iran, while harshly criticizing Iran itself. A failure by the G7 to present viable solutions to crises such as war and economic uncertainty demonstrates that it has not lived up to its responsibilities as a key guardian of the international order. U.S. President Donald Trump's preferences strongly shaped the agenda and outcome documents, yet Trump himself departed early, rendering hollow any facade of unity that had been orchestrated. Despite the G7 being originally envisioned as a forum for coordination among Japan, the U.S. and Europe, Trump relentlessly pursued only his "America First" objectives. This behavior must be called out as self-serving. However, the other nations were afraid of the talks collapsing entirely, and thus chose instead to obediently follow Trump's lead. This, too, was problematic; a vigorous exchange of views would have better clarified key issues. Japan also shares partial responsibility for this failure. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba presented information on Chinese and North Korean military activities as "Asia's representative." Although he reportedly expressed "concern under international law" regarding Israel's actions, the firm stance he displayed before the summit faded away. Such behavior risks appearing to endorse Western double standards, effectively giving Israel preferential treatment while emphatically condemning Russia for its aggression against Ukraine. Historically, Japan has built trust with Palestine and Iran through sustained humanitarian assistance and investment. This reputation, carefully established over many years, could now face damage. The inward-looking stance demonstrated by the G7 this year has likely caused disappointment among the emerging and developing nations collectively known as the Global South, which are already pressured by major-power politics. If the G7 continues to tacitly accommodate states such as Russia and Israel, which are attempting to alter the status quo through force, suspicion will only deepen. Moreover, global confidence in the rules-based international order may suffer lasting harm. The G7 urgently needs to clarify and correct its own approach. Rather than continuously relying on U.S. leadership, Japan, Europe and Canada should instead proactively work toward stabilizing and safeguarding global order.

NHK

4 hours ago

• NHK

IAEA chief warns against strike on Iran's nuclear power plant

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said at a UN Security Council meeting that the Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran should not be attacked. At the outset of the emergency meeting held on Friday at Iran's request, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called on all the parties to "give peace a chance," amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran. Guterres said that while Iran has repeatedly stated that it is not seeking nuclear weapons, there is a "trust gap." He went on to say that "the only way to bridge that gap is through diplomacy to establish a credible, comprehensive and verifiable solution." IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi told the meeting that strikes on Iranian nuclear sites have not, so far, led to a radiological release affecting the public. But he warned that a direct hit on the Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran, which is in operation, or a hit that disabled the lines supplying electricity to the plant, could result in a high release of radioactivity to the environment. Grossi added that armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place. Israel's UN Ambassador Danny Danon said, "We do not apologize for striking Iran's nuclear facilities." He also said, "We will not stop, not until Iran's nuclear threat is dismantled." Iran's UN Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani said Israeli attacks are in violation of the UN Charter and UN Security Council resolutions, and an assault on the global non-proliferation regime. He also said Iran's nuclear program is peaceful, and under the world's most extensive IAEA inspections.