formal

Are Beijing and Moscow at the cusp of a formal alliance? – Middle East Monitor

It should matter little to the Chinese that American diplomats and a handful of their western allies will not be attending the Beijing Winter Olympics in February. What truly matters is that the Russians are coming.

The above is not an arbitrary statement. It is supported with facts. According to a survey conducted by China’s Global Times newspaper, the majority of the Chinese people value their country’s relations with Russia more than that of the EU and certainly more than that of the United States. The newspaper reported that such a finding makes it “the first time in 15 years that China-US ties did not top the list of the important bilateral relations in the Global Times annual survey.”

In fact, some kind of an alliance is already forming between China and Russia. The fact that the Chinese people are taking note of this and are supporting their government’s drive towards greater integration – political, economic and geostrategic – between Beijing and Moscow, indicates that the informal and potentially formal alliance is a long-term strategy for both nations.

American hostilities towards China, as seen by the Chinese, have become unbearable, and the Chinese people and government seem to have lost, not only any trust, however modest, of Washington, but of its own political system as well. 66 per cent of all Chinese either disapproved of the US democratic system – or whatever remains of it – or believe that US democracy has sharply declined. Ironically, the vast majority of Americans share such a bleak view of their own country, according to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Centre in 2019 and again by the Michigan Public Policy Survey in 2021.

This leads us to two possible conclusions: First, the Chinese people will not be pushing for an American-style democracy any time soon and, second, the Chinese trust in the US does not hinge on what political party controls the White House or Congress.

OPINION: Turkey’s balancing act between Russia and Ukraine

While the Chinese negative view of the US is unmistakably clear, Beijing remains hopeful that existing divisions with the European Union would allow it to expand economically in a region that is rife with financial and political opportunities, thus strategic growth. This fact offers China and Russia yet another area of potential cooperation, as Russia is also keen to expand into the European markets using its recently completed Nord Stream 2 gas project. Though Europe is already struggling with gas shortages, Europeans are divided on whether Russia should be allowed to claim a massive geostrategic influence by having such sway over the EU energy needs.

Germany, which already receives nearly a third of its gas supplies from Russia – through Nord Stream 1 – is worried that allowing Nord Stream 2 to operate would make it too dependent on Russian gas supplies. Under intense pressure from Washington, Germany is caught between a rock and a hard place:  it needs Russian gas to keep its economy afloat, but is worried about American retaliation. To appease Washington, the German government threatened, on 16 December, to block the new pipeline if Russia invades Ukraine. But is Germany in a position that allows it to make such demands?

Meanwhile, Washington is keeping a close watch on Russia’s and China’s strategic expansion westward, and it views the ‘threat’ posed by both countries with great alarm. In his recent visit to Scotland to take part in the COP26, US President Joe Biden accused China and Russia of “walking away” on “a gigantic issue”, referring to climate change. China has “lost the ability to influence people around the world and here in COP. The same way I would argue with Russia,” Biden said on 3 November.

But will such rhetoric make any difference, or sway traditional US allies to boycott the lucrative deals and massive economic opportunities presented by the two emerging Asian giants?

According to Eurostat, in 2020, China overtook the US as Europe’s largest import and third-largest export partner. Moreover, according to Nature magazine, most European countries largely depend on Russian energy sources, with the European Union estimated to import nearly 40 per cent of its natural gas from Russia.

In the face of these vastly changing realities, the US seems to be running out of options. The Summit for Democracy, orchestrated by Washington last December, seemed like a desperate cry for attention as opposed to celebrating the supposed democratic countries. 111 countries participated in the conference. The participants were handpicked by Washington and included such countries as Israel, Albania and Ukraine. China and Russia were, of course, excluded, not because of their lack of democratic credentials – such notions are often of no relevance to the politicised US definition of ‘democracy’ – but because they, along with others, were meant to be left isolated in the latest US hegemonic move.

READ: Fewer ships sailing to Russia due to possible war in Ukraine, Turkish ship spotter says

The conference, expectedly, turned out to be an exercise in futility. Needless to say, the US is in no position to give democracy lessons to anyone. The attempted coup in Washington by tens of thousands of angry US militants on 6 January, 2021 – coupled with various opinion polls attesting to Americans’ lack of faith in their elected institutions – places the US democracy brand at an all-time low.

As the US grows desperate in its tactics – aside from increasingly ineffectual sanctions, aggressive language and the relentless waving of the democracy card – China and Russia continue to draw closer to one another, on all fronts. In an essay entitled ‘Respecting People’s Democratic Rights’, written jointly by the ambassadors of Beijing and Moscow in Washington, Qin Gang and Anatoly Antonov wrote in the National Interest magazine that the democracy summit was “an evident product of (US’s) Cold-War mentality,” which “will stoke up ideological confrontation and a rift in the world, creating new ‘dividing lines’.”

But there is more than their mutual rejection of American hostilities that is bringing China and Russia closer. The two countries are not motivated by their fear of the American military or some NATO invasion. Russia’s and China’s militaries are moving from strength to strength and neither country is experiencing the anxiety often felt by smaller, weaker and relatively isolated countries that have faced direct or indirect US military threats.

To push back against possible NATO expansion, the Russian military is actively mobilising in various regions at its western borders. For its part, the Chinese military has made it clear that any US-led attempt aimed at altering the balance of power in the Taiwan Strait would provoke an immediate military retaliation. In a virtual meeting with the US President, Chinese President Xi Jinping warned Biden on 16 November that the US was “playing with fire”. “Whoever plays with fire will get burnt,” he threatened.

The Chinese-Russian alliance aims largely at defending the two countries’ regional and international interests, which are in constant expansion. In the case of China, the country is now a member of what is considered the world’s largest economic pact. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which was officiated on 1 January, covers a global market that caters to around 30 per cent of the world’s population.

Russia, too, operates based on multiple regional and international alliances. One of these military alliances is the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), which is currently involved in ‘peacekeeping’ operations in Kazakhstan. From Syria in the Middle East, to Venezuela in South America to Mali in West Africa and beyond, Russia’s military influence has increased to the extent that, in September 2021, Moscow signed military cooperation agreements with Africa’s two most populous nations, Nigeria and Ethiopia, challenging the traditional dominance of the US and France on the African continent.

Informally, China and Russia are already operating according to a regional and global model that can be compared to that of the now-defunct Warsaw Treaty Organisation (1955-91), a political and military alliance between the Soviet Union and several Eastern European countries that aimed at counter-balancing the US-led NATO alliance. The Warsaw Pact pushed back against US-led western hegemony and laboured to protect the interests of the pact’s members throughout the world. History seems to be repeating itself, though under different designations.

Historically, the two countries have had a difficult and, at times, antagonistic relationship, dating back to the 19th century. During the Nikita Khrushchev era, Beijing and Moscow even broke their ties altogether. The Sino-Soviet split of 1960 was earth-shattering to the extent that it transformed the bipolarity of the Cold War, where China operated as an entirely independent party.

Though diplomatic relations between Beijing and Moscow were restored in 1989, it was not until the collapse of the Soviet Union that cooperation between both nations intensified. For example, the decision, in 1997, to coordinate their diplomatic positions in the United Nations gave birth to the Joint Declaration on a Multipolar World and the Establishment of a New International Order. That agreement between Russia and China laid the foundations for the actively evolving multi-polar world that is currently transpiring before our eyes.

Present reality – namely US, NATO, EU pressures – has compelled Russia and China to slowly, but surely cement their relationship, especially on the economic, diplomatic and military fronts. Writing in Carnegie Moscow Centre, Alexander Gabuev explained that, according to data provided by the Russian Federal Customs Service, “China’s share in Russian foreign trade grew from 10.5 per cent in 2013 (before the Ukraine crisis and sanctions) to 16.7 per cent in 2019 and 18.3 per cent in the pandemic-struck 2020.”

READ: US, NATO dispute with Russia does not undermine Turkey Black Sea rights

Moreover, the two countries are holding regular large-scale joint military exercises, aimed at strengthening their growing security and military cooperation.

This already close relation is likely to develop even further in the near future, especially as China finds itself compelled to diversify its energy sources. This became a pressing need following recent tensions between Australia, a NATO member, and China. Currently, Australia is the main natural gas supplier to Beijing.

On its own, Russia cannot conclusively defeat Western designs. China, too, despite its massive economic power, cannot play a geopolitical game of this calibre without solid alliances. Both countries greatly benefit from building an alternative to US-led political, economic and military alliances, starting with NATO. The need for a Russian-Chinese alliance becomes even more beneficial when seen through the various opportunities presenting themselves: growing weakness in the US’s own political system, cracks within US-EU relations and the faltering power of NATO itself. Turkey, for example, though a NATO member, has for years been exploring its own geopolitical alliances outside the NATO paradigm. Turkey is already cementing its ties with both Russia and China, and on various fronts. Other countries, for example Iran and various South American countries, that have been targeted by the US for refusing to toe Washington’s political line, are desperately seeking non-western alliances to protect their interests, their sovereignty and their heavily sanctioned economies.

While it is still too early to claim that China and Russia are anywhere near a full-blown alliance of the Warsaw nature, there is no reason to believe that the cooperation between both countries will be halted or even slow down anytime soon. The question is how far are Beijing and Moscow willing to go to protect their interests.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

Source link

Australian PM announces formal recognition of Palestine | United Nations

NewsFeed

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced Australia’s formally recognition of the State of Palestine, in a coordinated move with the UK and Canada, in an effort to revive a two-state solution. Albanese made the declaration from New York where he’ll be attending the UN General Assembly this week.

Source link

Starmer announces formal UK recognition of Palestinian state

Harry Farleypolitical correspondent, and

Jessica Rawnsley

Watch: Starmer says UK recognises Palestinian state

Sir Keir Starmer has announced the UK’s recognition of a Palestinian state, in what represents a significant change in government policy.

In a video statement on X, the prime minister said: “In the face of the growing horror in the Middle East we are acting to keep alive the possibility of peace and a two-state solution.”

Australia and Canada also announced formal recognition of the state of Palestine, with Portugal and France expected to follow.

The decision has drawn fierce criticism from the Israeli government, families of hostages held in Gaza and some Conservatives. Responding on Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said a Palestinian state “will not happen”.

Saying he had “a clear message” to the leaders who had declared recognition, he added: “You are giving a huge reward to terrorism”.

Both the Israeli and US governments say recognition is a diplomatic gift for Hamas following its attack in southern Israel on 7 October 2023 in which 1,200 people were killed and 251 taken hostage.

Sir Keir insisted the decision “is not a reward for Hamas” because it means Hamas can have “no future, no role in government, no role in security”.

“Our call for a genuine two-state solution is the exact opposite of [Hamas’s] hateful vision,” he said.

The move is a “pledge to the Palestinian and Israeli people that there can be a better future”, he continued, adding the “starvation and devastation [in Gaza] are utterly intolerable” and the “death and destruction horrifies all of us”.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas welcomed the decision, which Sir Keir had confirmed in a letter to the leader, saying it would help pave the way for the “state of Palestine to live side by side with the state of Israel in security, peace and good neighbourliness”.

The Foreign Office said it means the UK “recognises Palestinian statehood over provisional borders, based on 1967 lines with equal land swaps, to be finalised as part of future negotiations”.

The two-state solution refers to the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital, broadly along the lines that existed prior to the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

A state of Palestine is currently recognised by around 75% of the UN’s 193 member states, but has no internationally agreed boundaries, capital or army – making recognition largely symbolic.

Due to Israel’s military occupation in the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority, set up in the wake of peace agreements in the 1990s, is not in full control of its land or people. In Gaza, where Israel is also the occupying power, Hamas has been the sole ruler since 2007.

Announcing Canada’s recognition on Sunday, Prime Minister Mark Carney offered “partnership in building the promise of a peaceful future” for both Palestine and Israel, while Australia’s Anthony Albanese said it was “part of a co-ordinated effort to build new momentum for a two-state solution”.

In July, Sir Keir set a deadline of the UN General Assembly meeting, which takes place next week, for the UK to announce recognition unless Israel took “substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and commit to a long-term, sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a two-state solution”.

Efforts to secure a ceasefire in Gaza – let alone a long-term solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict – have faltered. Israel sparked international outrage when it recently carried out an air strike on a Hamas negotiating team in Qatar.

Infographic showing global recognition of Palestine by UN member states, grouped by region, as of 21 September 2025. Countries are represented as circles: purple for recognises Palestine, grey for does not recognise, yellow for pending. In the Americas, only the US, Canada and Panama do not recognise. In Europe, most countries recognise; the UK is now purple, while France and Portugal are yellow (pending), with several western and northern countries grey. Africa is almost entirely purple except Cameroon. The Middle East is purple except Israel. Asia is mostly purple except Japan. In Oceania, most are grey, but Australia and two others are purple. Source: UN and BBC research.

Government sources said the situation on the ground had worsened significantly in the last few weeks, citing images showing starvation and violence in Gaza that Sir Keir previously described as “intolerable”.

On Sunday, the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry said 71 people were killed and 304 injured in Israeli attacks in the past 24 hours.

Israel’s latest ground operation in Gaza City, described by a UN official as “cataclysmic”, has forced hundreds of thousands of people to flee.

It is the latest Israeli offensive in the nearly two-year war which has seen much of the Palestinian territory’s population displaced, its infrastructure destroyed, and at least 65,208 people killed, according to the Gaza health ministry.

Earlier this week, a UN commission of inquiry concluded Israel had committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, which Israel denounced as “distorted and false”.

UK ministers have also highlighted the continued expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law, as a key factor in the decision to recognise Palestinian statehood.

Mohammed Jarrar, mayor of the West Bank city of Jenin, told the BBC that “this Israeli government wants to annex the West Bank” – but stressed that recognition was important as “it confirms the fact that the Palestinian people possess a state, even if it is under occupation”.

Netanyahu repeated his intentions on Sunday, saying “we doubled Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] and we will continue on this path”.

Far-right Israeli minister Itamar Ben Gvir responded to the news by calling for Israel to annex the West Bank and dismantle the Palestinian Authority.

UK Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy acknowledged recognition would not necessarily change reality on the ground, but said “now is the time to stand up for a two-state solution”.

He told BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme: “Will this feed children? No, it won’t. That’s down to humanitarian aid. Will it free hostages? That must be down to a ceasefire.”

EPA Smoke rises at the Harmony Tower following an Israeli airstrike in the west of Gaza CityEPA

Israel’s offensive on Gaza City, where one million people were living and famine was confirmed in August, has forced thousands to flee

Husam Zomlot, the Palestinian Authority’s UK representative, told the BBC that recognition was an “inalienable right” that would mean “ending the denial of our existence” and that “the British people should celebrate today, when history is being corrected”.

“The question is never why should the UK recognise the state of Palestine,” he said, “the question is why didn’t the UK recognise the state of Palestine all along?”

Reacting to UK recognition, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called the move “absolutely disastrous”, adding: “Rewarding terrorism with no conditions whatsoever put in place for Hamas.”

Shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel accused the prime minister of “capitulating to the hard-left factions of his party”.

But Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey welcomed the decision, which he said was “long overdue”.

A map of Israel, the West Bank, Gaza and surrounding countries

Recognition has long been a cause championed by many within Labour. The PM has been under mounting pressure to take a tougher stance on Israel, particularly from MPs on the left of his party.

Mandy Damari, mother of former UK-Israeli hostage Emily Damari, said Sir Keir was “under a two-state delusion”. Recognition rewarded Hamas while hostages were still in Gaza and the group still in power, she said.

The Hostages and Missing Families Forum UK, which represents relatives of captives with British ties, condemned the decision, calling it a “betrayal of humanity and a move that rewards Hamas while 48 hostages remain in captivity”. Of the hostages still being held, around 20 are still thought to be alive.

“Instead of confronting Hamas, Britain has emboldened it,” the group said in a statement.

Asked about these concerns, Lammy said he had been discussing the issue with relatives, adding: “I think it’s also right to say that there are many hostage families who are shocked and appalled that the prospects of a ceasefire have been set back just in the recent days.”

He added it was important to recognise that “Hamas is not the Palestinian people”.

Hamas on Sunday welcomed the recognition as an “important step in affirming the right of our Palestinian people to their land and holy sites” but said it must be accompanied by “practical measures” that would lead to an “immediate end” to the war.

Sir Keir, who has repeatedly said Hamas can have no role in the future governance of a Palestinian state, said during his announcement that the UK had already proscribed and sanctioned Hamas and that he had directed work to sanction further Hamas figures in the coming weeks.

Source link

ITV ‘launch formal investigation into Good Morning Britain’ after shocking blunder

ITV have reportedly launched a formal investigation into an incident that sparked outrage on Good Morning Britain earlier this year on Holocaust Memorial Day

Ranvir Singh
ITV is investigating Good Morning Britain’s Holocaust Memorial Day coverage after Ranvir Singh failed to say victims were Jewish(Image: ITV)

ITV have reportedly launched a formal probe into Good Morning Britain after one ‘humiliating blunder too big to ignore’ left viewers outraged. The broadcaster’s long-running early morning programme aired a tribute to the victims of one of history’s biggest atrocities on Holocaust Memorial Day earlier this year.

On that day, presenter Ranvir Singh was reporting and while she mentioned that the six million people killed in the death camps were ‘disabled, gay or belonged to another ethnic group’, but did not make it clear that that figure applied to solely the Jewish victims, and didn’t appear to realise that there were 11 million victims in total. The episode in question aired on the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau in January, and it is now thought that the incident has become the subject of a formal investigation.

A source told The Sun : “Good Morning Britain is a flagship programme for ITV and to allow a blunder like this was too big to simply ignore. They are now investigating how this happened and the top brass want answers. ITV pride themselves on their news coverage but this was lower than sub par.”

READ MORE: Kate Middleton has emotional reunion with Holocaust survivors at poignant eventREAD MORE: Full list of ITV hosts KEEPING their job amid major cuts ‘revealed’

Ranvir Singh
At the time, Ranvir hastily apologised for her slip-up but now insiders say that an official probe has been launched by bosses(Image: ITV)

The insider also claimed that ‘the probe will uncover who allowed it to happen and there will be consequences’ for those involved, adding that it ‘has been hugely humiliating and is a headache the bosses over at ITV really could do without.’

The Mirror has approached ITV for comment on the probe they have launched. At the time, the blunder sparked outrage and Ranvir, who also regularly covers for Lorraine Kelly on her eponymous daytime show, was quick to apologise for her error.

She said: “In yesterday’s news when we reported on the memorial events in Auschwitz, we said six million people were killed in the Holocaust, but crucially failed to say they were Jewish. That was our mistake, for which we apologise.”

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the show said: “In our studio introduction to the report on the 80th anniversary of Auschwitz we failed to acknowledge the Jewish community which we have since apologised for live on air in today’s programme.

“This failure was done in error, however clear reference to Jewish people in the correspondent news report from Auschwitz immediately followed, as well as a further extended programme report referencing the six million Jewish victims. Yesterday’s programme also included a live studio interview with a survivor of Auschwitz, Rachel Levy alongside Olivia Marks-Woldman, Chief Executive of the Holocaust Memorial Trust, both of whom talked candidly about their own experiences as Jewish people.”

The clip came under fire on social media, with one person writing: “Disgusting shameful!” A second added: “This can’t be for real?” “This coverage is utterly disgraceful! This history must not be forgotten, nor must it be distorted. The Jews were the victims then – we must make sure that they will never be the victims again,” said another.

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .



Source link