While Trump talks about the immediate possibility of leaving there, certain of victory as seen, leaving the Iranians “in the stone age” after the escalation of military actions, the first definite signal of China's involvement in solving a tragic situation that affects the economic security of the world and beyond appears.
PHOTO X
We now have from the two countries a Peace Plan for the Near East
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjbzhd/202603/t20260331_11884511.html
which would involve the immediate cessation of hostilities, the start of peace negotiations as quickly as possible, ensuring the security of the areas that are now the main targets of American-Israeli bombing or land invasion, immediate measures to ensure maritime transport, all in strict compliance with the provisions of the UN Charter.
At the end of last month, during a meeting in Islamabad, the basic idea of the plan was supported by the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt, and a quadripartite coordination committee (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt) is now operational. The current initiative, Chinese official sources note, is part of the “cooperative strategic partnership” between China and Pakistan, countries that are now celebrating the 75th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations.
With a major downside: no one knows if the Israelis (and, consequently, their American allies) will accept this last point considered essential for resolving the crisis because only in this way will the involvement and support of the international community, now mostly in favor of military actions, be ensured, a fact that leads to serious dissensions and very tense accusations between NATO allies, to mention only this dimension.
In this particular context, if the Israelis and the American partners will accept that everything will be resolved in terms of the UN Charter, this implies that, very surprisingly, they would give in from the principled position now that implies precisely ignoring the UN and its institutions (the International Criminal Court as the relevant court for judging war crimes, genocide, etc.) and, who knows, they will feel obliged to accept future control formulas that assume UN troops to maintain and enforce peace. Personally, I think we are very far from such a moment but no one can assume what Trump would like or not.
What would the 5 points contain in the initial version now circulated between the two chancelleries and reached several relevant capitals for political and military decision-making (this time with a real involvement of some of the European countries and, obviously, Russia in order to ensure a barrage of force in case of a possible negative vote by the US in the Security Council):
- Immediate ceasefire and maximum efforts to prevent escalation of the conflict. Humanitarian aid must be guaranteed in all areas now affected by military action.
- The start of peace negotiations as soon as possible, with the plan emphasizing the need to respect the national sovereignty, territorial integrity and national independence of Iran and the Gulf States.
- Securing areas with non-military structures that may become potential targets
- Securing sea lanes and resumption of international trade, resumption of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and adjacent maritime areas essential for world trade and oil and gas supplies.
- Protection of civilians in accordance with the UN Charter, supporting a solution based on multilateralism and leading to a strengthening of the role of the UN in establishing the global framework for sustainable peace.
Maybe something will be, especially since a lot of people are now hoping that the move of the Chinese colossus could mean the beginning of a solution. What about the others?
You know Trump's response, continued threat and presumable quick departure from the area, leaving the sycophants to deal with the disaster they created. But what do the Iranians say?
From there we have the position expressed today by Kazem Jalali, the Iranian ambassador in Moscow, for the Tass Agency, who stated four requirements for a stable peace in the Near East. “The first condition is a complete cessation of aggression and terrorist acts. The second condition is the provision of objective and credible guarantees to prevent a resumption of aggression and war. The third condition is full compensation for our material and moral losses. Fourth, it is about respecting Iran's legal jurisdiction in the Strait of Hormuz in order to protect international maritime security.”
Rationally, everything seems to be acceptable under the terms of the Geneva Convention and the UN Charter. But is that what it's all about? But, anyway, pay close attention to what comes next because if we haven't seen the internationalization of the conflict (and that's why Trump is rightfully angry), then we might have an internationalization of the peace solution.
With the inherent advantages and risks that interest absolutely everyone, because it is no longer about Ukraine and the small arrangements in our area. And that's why, I think, China started moving. Let's see with what results.
.
