Wang Yi cautioned against a return to the ‘law of the jungle’ but stopped short of criticising Trump directly

War in the Middle East “should never have happened”, China’s foreign minister Wang Yi has declared, even as he struck a more conciliatory tone with the US ahead of a highly anticipated visit by Donald Trump.

Regime change, a key stated aim of the US president as the US and Israel continue to attack Iran, “will find no popular support”, Wang said on Sunday. “A strong fist does not mean strong reason. The world cannot return to the law of the jungle,” he added.

Speaking on the sidelines of China’s annual parliamentary and political gatherings, known as the Two Sessions, the country’s top diplomat and foreign affairs official notably avoided directly criticising the US.

  • 73ms@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    36 minutes ago

    It would never have happened if Kamala was the president and if it had she’d have ended it in 24 hours.

  • Etterra@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Well I mean how else was the president going to distract us all from him being in the Epstein files millions of times.

    • Patrikvo@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      25 minutes ago
      • Universal health care.
      • Financial help for the poor.
      • Free music performances in all states
      • Large momnument construction
      • Investing in local infrastructure
      • Visiting sick kids in a hospital.

      Probably a lot more of those. And none of these involve killing people.

    • Wataba@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Theyre just taking advantage of a golden opportunity for PR.

      I don’t believe its honest, given what goes on inside their own borders.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    The world cannot return to the law of the jungle,” he added.

    If only he had said that to Putin too, when Russia invaded Ukraine and started a full scale war.
    Time for Europe to hold him to this announcement.

        • pet the cat, walk the dog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          51 minutes ago

          Iirc they said that diplomatic measures should’ve been employed instead.

          All in all, it doesn’t matter, because they just keep this ‘neutral’ thing going and denounce this and that. The actual trade policy and such work by a completely different logic. They aren’t gonna boycott the US or sever trade with them, just as they haven’t with Russia.

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            41 minutes ago

            Iirc they said that diplomatic measures should’ve been employed instead.

            Which is total bullshit, what diplomatic measureless were necessary or even possible? When Ukraine was absolutely peaceful, and Putin was promised that Ukraine wouldn’t become a NATO member? And Putin attacked Ukraine with an argument of denazification, which is insane since Ukraine is a democracy, and their leader is Jewish! Of the 2 Russia is clearly the very Nazi like totalitarian regime.

            That statement by China was for appearances only, it was hollow and completely lacked any criticism of Putin or Russia or the war crimes Russia is committing.

            Which is why I don’t remember China speaking against the war in any real way.

  • Redditsux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    18 hours ago

    China has to speak from both sides of the mouth. Iran is a client and source of its oil. US is a client and source of its $1 trillion dollar trade surplus. China needs both of them.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      You don’t understand the situation. China does not consider Taiwan a separate independent country, and has never recognized it as such. Unfortunately USA and most of the world has agreed to accept the 1 China policy, which means Taiwan is not treated as a real country in many international contexts.
      China see Taiwan as an occupied part of China.
      So by their definition they are within their right to attack Taiwan, including by international law as they see it.
      So in their view, they can say this, and attack Taiwan, without seeing that as a double standard. And the west has basically agreed to it from a legal perspective. But at the same time USA say they protect Taiwan, which would traditionally have meant likely the rest of NATO too. But now NATO is in shambles because of Trump, so maybe USA will be alone now. America first!

    • Riverside@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      11 hours ago

      How’s this post related to Taiwan? Do you have to talk about the island every single time China is mentioned?

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        It’s not related to Taiwan, but that commenter made a connection. Do you not get it?

        • Riverside@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          10 hours ago

          The western lib obsession with Taiwan is unbelievable. China hasn’t entered a war in 50+ years, it’s literally inconceivable for the western mind that China actually has good trade relations with Taiwan, because you can only understand violence and sanction, as is the case of Cuba by the US.

          • Wataba@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Using ‘lib’ as an insult just exposes the idiocy, thanks for self reporting.

            Red MAGA, Green MAGA, it doesn’t change.

            • Riverside@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              It’s not an insult, it’s a description of your political position, a shortening of the word “liberal” in the USian sense of the word. I’m not even from the US, you can hardly call me MAGA.

              What’s green MAGA? Genuinely curious, I never heard that before. Maybe following the teachings of Gaddafi’s green book?

  • ominous ocelot@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    Any war should never have happened. But at one point some people decide that the status quo isn’t good and war is the only way to move forward. Perfectly good resources are wasted, civilians die, trust between peoples is destroyed.

    And when war has begun, politicians again use the war as a basis for argumentation for their own agenda. It colors the meaning of a statement.

    • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      20 hours ago

      It’s mind-boggling that the entire history of war hasn’t been “our leaders decided they wanted a war so we tossed them in a pit with sharp sticks to figure things out and suddenly they decided war was avoidable”

      We have more in common with a random American Crack dealer, a random middle-Eastern farmer, Chinese retail worker, South American factory worker, than anyone who leads major countries, anyone in the 1%.

      I have no ill will toward any Iranian, in fact I’ve known quite a few immigrants and think better of Iran than most US states, yet my country leaders decided it was a good idea to bomb the fuck out of them. We should toss them in a hole until they can work together with the rest of us, yet here we are…

      • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        i met a few iranians, one was obviously Openly lgbtq+ another one later in a different university was ba’hai and she hated the islamic regime because they were ethnically cleansing the ba’hai

      • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        18 hours ago

        The perversion of executive into leader is part of how we got here. Executives are supposed to answer I other people not lead anything. Like how a CEO in theory answers to a board of directors.

      • Hamartia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Wouldn’t the world be rapidly conquered by some Thrud the Barbarian type leader then?

        • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          19 hours ago

          You know, I was considering putting the potential downside of “one country might just have a young and jacked leader that can thrash all the old rich people” but figured my comment was getting too long for anyone to care to read.

          I think at that point the people would just have to chuck him in an active volcano instead of a pit.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      We need to have our leaders personally duel instead, loser can give some concessions. Challenged leader gets to pick the weapon…

  • D_C@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Just about everything that tRUMP is even remotely connected to almost definitely shouldn’t have happened.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    China has the power to end the war with ultimatums against US navy, if not Tel Aviv. Tolerating an illegal war “that should have never happened” is weakness or opportunism. US may be too depleted to prevent China focused annexations, and they may get reconstruction/development contracts with Iran.

    The pure demonism of Israel to only want destruction of country, and perpetual assassinations of every leader is something that deserves a nuclear ultimatum for immediate ceasefire, and if not for IDF/people to exterminate their own rulership within a short number of days. The pretense of US strength is oppressive, and must be disillusioned instead of the “do nothing and win” slow advantage accumulation of China.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      We absolutely do NOT want to escalate it to a nuclear war, are you insane?

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Israel would take the safe bet of ceasing their illegal war, or IDF/citizens could choose the extermination of their demonic rabid rulers. Perhaps Israelis devotion to genocide is not phased by the prospects of losing the game they initiated. US forces also get the freedom to leave, but sinking navies is allowed, and nuclear is just quick and easy. Nuclear weapons promised peace over demonic BS. If no one ever threatens world peace, then demonic crackheads will never stop.

        Other than the very convenient fighting between Pakistan and Afghanistan leading up to Iran war, would you prefer Chinese/Pakistan Air force operations to shoot down axis bombing jets? Blow up Gulf bases, and assassinate the pig fuckers that oppress their people and let US bases operate? Perhaps you just want to protect the pig fuckers with more time for destruction, or not allow other countries/people side against them?

        For those with the power to stop wrong, saying something’s wrong (as in Venezuela/Cuba/Caribbean fishing boat bombings) and not doing anything about it, hasn’t stopped a bigger wrong the following week, because even when they say it is unacceptable, doing nothing is defacto acceptable.