news

this article is reproduced from [cctv news client];

on the 25th local time, 12 countries and organizations including the united states and france issued a joint statement calling for an immediate ceasefire on the lebanese-israeli border for 21 days. on the 26th, western media even stated that the ceasefire would be achieved "within a few hours." however, this statement was immediately criticized. israel denies it. for what purpose did the united states propose a ceasefire, and what were israel's considerations in rejecting the ceasefire? let’s look at the expert analysis.

retrenchment of u.s. middle east strategy cannot prevent the israel-lebanon conflict. the united states has lost its binding force on israel

experts believe that the united states is implementing an overall trend of strategic contraction in the middle east. the united states neither wants to be involved in the quagmire nor does it want the regional situation to be completely out of control; and if a ceasefire can be achieved through mediation, u.s. president biden will gain a diplomatic legacy. however, experts say that the united states has lost its ability to restrain israel, and israel has become more unscrupulous towards the united states.

li zixin, assistant researcher at the china institute of international studies: israel has been bombing lebanon for many days. what israel wants to achieve is to be able to severely damage hezbollah, or to establish relevant control in the southern region of lebanon, to establish a so-called military buffer zone, or to have some ideas about its territory. all of these goals must be achieved through subsequent larger-scale ground operations, so for israel, it is certainly not the end of the entire war. the united states proposed a ceasefire of more than 20 days. in fact, it is completely inconsistent with israel's current needs, so israel must deny such a proposal.

u.s. diplomacy in the middle east questioned as "blind" policies intensify regional conflicts

the wall street journal of the united states stated on the 23rd that the white house’s middle east policy is almost “blind”. both allies and adversaries are increasingly ignoring the wishes of the united states. why do more and more american media believe that the white house’s diplomatic goals in the middle east are impossible to achieve? experts point out that the essence of u.s. middle east policy is american hegemony. the united states has long deliberately ignored the conflicts in the middle east and marginalized the palestinian issue, which is precisely the trigger for the escalation of the current round of palestinian-israeli conflict.

special commentator su xiaohui: it is obvious that the us strategic layout in the middle east has exacerbated regional insecurity and undermined regional peace. the united states really wants to shrink from the middle east, but in order to shrink, it relies more on its allies and partners in the middle east. therefore, in terms of security, it continues to strengthen relations with israel, provides military assistance to israel, uses israel to achieve its own goals, and favors israel. this is the logic line of the current deviation and danger of the us middle east policy.