For as compelling as this hypothesis may be to many on social media, especially anti-Zionist activists, it doesn’t account for why Israel still allows China’s state-owned Shanghai International Port Group to run the Port of Haifa, which is one of the Jewish State’s economic lifelines.
Andrew Korybko
One of Israel’s last strikes against Iran before its surprise ceasefire
with the US, which Israel has thus far abided by in the sense of
ceasing its attacks against the Islamic Republic even though it’s still contentiously waging war against Lebanon in violation of the reported terms, was against a rail bridge. Social media as well as Ukrainian media
drew attention to how the targeted infrastructure is part of the
China-Central Asia-West Asia Economic Corridor within China’s Belt &
Road Initiative (BRI).
The innuendo is that Israel meant to target BRI, perhaps as part Under Secretary of War Elbridge Colby’s “Strategy of Denial”, which has so far seen the US seek control over China’s top oil suppliers (already Venezuela and possibly soon Iran and Angola).
It therefore isn’t unreasonable to speculate that Israel intended to
inflict strategic harm to China through this strike just like how its
earlier attack against Iran’s Caspian Fleet was portrayed as harming Russia and India’s trans-Iranian North-South Transport Corridor.
For
as compelling as this hypothesis may be to many on social media,
especially anti-Zionist activists, it doesn’t account for why Israel
still allows China’s state-owned Shanghai International Port Group to
run the Port of Haifa, which is one of the Jewish State’s economic
lifelines. This analysis here from March 2017 explained in general why China chose to partner with Israel, while this one here from a year and a half later in September 2018 specifically addressed its interests in the Port of Haifa.
Opinion about this deal within Israel is mixed, with some praising it as “delivering more benefits to Israelis” like the preceding hyperlinked opinion piece from last year argued, while this one here
from around the same time warned that “Israel risks becoming a tool in
China’s war against the West”. Nevertheless, the importance is that
Israel and China still honor this deal, which proves that they envisage
Israel playing a role in BRI. This think tank report here elaborates more on their shared vision.
The
reality, which no doubt displeases many anti-Zionist activists, is that
China’s political support of Palestine and Iran doesn’t take precedence
over its economic interests in Israel. Despite its rhetoric in
solidarity with those two, China will not “boycott, divest from, nor
sanction” Israel like the BDS movement demands. To the contrary, Global Times
reported in February that “Israeli imports from China reached a record
high of $13.53 billion in 2024, a 19.8 percent increase from the $11.29
billion in 2023”.
Their article amplified the Chinese Embassy in Israel’s statement at the time “Clarif[ying] Untrue Media Reports Claiming ‘China prohibits investment in Israel’”.
Far from shunning Israel over its wars against China’s partners, the
People’s Republic is embracing it more than ever and fighting back
against fake news about division between them over these conflicts, thus
humiliating those who claimed otherwise. The Alt-Media Community would therefore do well to acknowledge this fact even if they disagree with it.
The
takeaway is that Israel’s attack against that Iranian rail bridge
wasn’t intended to harm BRI, rather, it was to harm Iran’s military
logistics or simply inconvenience its people. China also doesn’t share
some of its supporters’ anti-Zionist zeal and isn’t punishing Israel in
any way. Quite the opposite, in fact, since trade has only grown since the Gaza War. This insight thus lends credence to reports that China pressed Iran to compromise with the US by agreeing to the two-week ceasefire and resuming negotiations.