Did Pakistan's Joining of the Peace Commission Betray China? Actually, China Has Already Given a Reassurance.

Trump's Peace Commission welcomed its largest group of "guests," with eighteen countries signing the charter in Davos and officially joining the Peace Commission. Among these eighteen countries, one stands out particularly: Pakistan. As a country that has long maintained deep friendly relations with our nation, Pakistan's move has raised questions about whether it is a betrayal of us. Actually, Pakistan has its own unique strategic considerations.

(Eighteen countries, including Pakistan, signed to join Trump's Peace Commission in Davos)

Pakistan's joining seems especially special at first glance, as the relationship between Pakistan and the United States has always been full of fluctuations.

First, the biggest issue is that Pakistan's diplomatic position in relation to the United States is marginalized. The former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Armitage once bluntly stated on this issue: "It has never been important for its own sake; its importance always comes from a third party." In the eyes of the United States, Pakistan is a "pawn" on the board in America's Asian strategic layout. Once Pakistan joins the Peace Commission, will Trump's excessive power and the concept of "America First" bind Pakistan? This is something many people are questioning.

Secondly, India. The U.S. effort to court India is the most unstable factor in the Pakistan-U.S. relationship.

This involves two points. First, the relationship between Pakistan and India itself includes long-standing territorial disputes and other hostile relations, as well as Pakistan's perception of Indian support for anti-government forces within its borders, which poses a threat of infiltration. If the U.S. sides with India, the situation will become even more complicated.

The second point is geopolitical strategy. In the 2022 U.S. National Security Strategy under President Biden, China was defined as a strategic competitor. This strategy requires the U.S. to develop relationships with countries in the Indo-Pacific region to form a "surrounding" of China, with India being one of the considered countries. Meanwhile, Pakistan has closer ties with China, and in the geopolitical confrontation between major powers, Pakistan is inevitably further away from the U.S.

Finally, there is Pakistan's relationship with Israel. Due to religious reasons, the two countries have not established diplomatic relations. This Peace Commission's first task is to resolve the issue in Gaza, aiming to completely disarm Hamas and rebuild it according to American interests. Therefore, Israel is certainly the winner. According to recent news, the U.S. plans to create a "vacation tourism area" in Gaza and wants to attract countries to invest, including Israeli developers.

(Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif of Pakistan)

On the surface, this peace plan led by Trump for the Gaza ceasefire almost equates to helping Israel complete the occupation of the Gaza Strip.

Therefore, from any perspective, Pakistan's joining of the U.S.-led Peace Commission is an unexpected move. As a result, there have been many voices of opposition within Pakistan. Leader of the Farooq faction, Rahman, warned that Pakistan should not take any actions supporting the disarming of Hamas, and once joined, it would mean that Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif might have to sit side by side with Netanyahu.

Additionally, online voices have questioned whether Pakistan is taking sides in the Sino-U.S. rivalry, aligning with the U.S.? Is this a betrayal of China?

Because this matter is indeed somewhat unusual, and the doubts directly point out the core issue, the Pakistani government has decided to respond to these doubts.

According to an article published by Dawn on January 22, the Pakistani Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that the basis for joining the committee is part of its ongoing efforts to support the implementation of the Gaza peace plan under the framework of UN Security Council Resolution 2803, and hopes that this new framework can bring practical results for the Gaza region, and help the Palestinian people establish an independent sovereign state through political processes.

Pakistan has brought the issue back to the United Nations, revealing that its participation in the Peace Commission is far from simply catering to U.S. unilateralism, but rather has complex strategic considerations.

The mentioned UN Resolution 2803 authorizes the establishment of the Peace Commission to handle the Gaza issue. Trump took this opportunity to exploit loopholes and attempted to establish a "new United Nations" with authority far exceeding the original regulations.

(The JF-17 Thunder fighter jet jointly developed by China and Pakistan)

Pakistan's support for the UN resolution is actually consistent with the concept behind China's statement regarding the Peace Commission. On January 21, the Chinese Foreign Ministry responded to questions about Trump's Peace Commission: "Regarding the United Nations, China has always practiced genuine multilateralism. No matter how the international situation changes, China will firmly uphold the international system with the United Nations at its core, the international order based on international law, and the basic principles of international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter."

In other words, China's adherence to the UN order also means non-interference in the decision-making rights of other countries, and full respect for the choices of other countries within the framework of the UN order. This statement not only reflects China's position, but also gives a reassurance of respect to countries like Pakistan with good relations.

Pakistan has limited its reasons for joining to the UN resolution, and all current objectives revolve around the reconstruction of Gaza. This move implies that Pakistan has the right to reject requests from the U.S. beyond the UN order, which also shows that Pakistan is not acting purely out of a desire to take sides.

Furthermore, under the new framework, the U.S. has expressed the intention to expand the mediation work to other conflict areas starting from Gaza. The India-Pakistan dispute is also a current issue facing Pakistan. By joining the Peace Commission under the name of upholding the UN order, Pakistan is actually adding another mechanism under the existing order to constrain India. Since the U.S. wants to be the leader of this Peace Commission, it must at least nominally bear responsibility for these issues. For Pakistan, this is also an opportunity.

Pakistan's diplomatic strategic considerations also reflect the survival wisdom of a non-major power in the face of a complex world situation.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7598404697468273167/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.