清华大学战略与安全研究中心研究员周波11月1日在《南华早报》发表Israel-Gaza war: what China can and should do for peace in the Middle East（巴以冲突：中国能够且应该为中东和平做些什么）的评论文章，分析巴以冲突中的中国作用。周波认为，中国有能力且必须运用在中东地区渐增的影响力，来防止冲突向域外蔓延。而最终解决巴以冲突， 并打破伊朗核问题僵局，需要中美两国合作。观察者网受权发布中英文稿。

【文/观察者网专栏作者 周波】

俄乌冲突与巴以冲突有什么不同？对于前者，没人知道何时结束；对于后者，没人知道即便结束了，何时又会再来。

中国能否助力中东实现和平？之所以提出这个问题，是因为其他大国目前面临的局限性显而易见。

俄罗斯在中东有相当大的影响力，但它自己正在打仗；伊朗则被认为是其武器供应国之一，所以赢得以色列信任的希望渺茫。欧盟两极分化严重，面对整个欧洲大陆内外亲巴勒斯坦穆斯林的抗议活动无能为力。美国是以色列的坚定盟友，历来在所有冲突中无条件地支持以色列。

那就只剩下中国了。在促成曾一度交恶的沙特阿拉伯和伊朗之间的历史性和解后，更加积极主动的中国甚至在本轮冲突爆发之前，就一直试图启动以色列和巴勒斯坦间的和平谈判。

沙特阿拉伯与伊朗和解（图源：路透社）

中国对巴勒斯坦事业的支持可以追溯到毛泽东时代。从20世纪80年代开始，中国也与以色列建立了牢固的经济关系。以色列对中国在10月7日的袭击事件后没有直接谴责哈马斯表示了失望。但是，正如中国外交部发言人毛宁所言，中国认为自己既是以色列的朋友，也是巴勒斯坦的朋友。

自最近的暴力事件爆发以来，中国已多次致电地区领导人，向该地区提供人道主义援助，并派遣了一名特使去阻止以色列的报复，这对联合国来说都是不可能完成的任务。中国所能做的最好的事，就是帮助避免冲突在地区蔓延。

这是有可能的。近年来，中东国家不断向中国靠拢。在以中国为中心的金砖国家最近一轮扩员中，有四个中东国家加入——埃及、伊朗、阿联酋和沙特阿拉伯。

现在，如果中国能利用其对伊朗的影响力，阻止黎巴嫩真主党（伊朗是其长期支持者）在以色列北部开辟战线，这将尤其有帮助。因为真主党拥有庞大的导弹库和数千名经验丰富的战士，与哈马斯相比，它对以色列的威胁更为严重。

中国可以做出贡献的另一个领域是维和。以色列不可能通过战争消灭哈马斯，并且以色列的占领肯定会适得其反。这意味着有一天可能需要维和行动。

巴勒斯坦过去呼吁向加沙和被占领的约旦河西岸派驻驻维和人员，以色列拒绝了。但它可能不得不重新考虑这一问题。

事实上，联合国第一个维和特派团的设立，就是为了监督1948年阿以战争停战协议的实施。如今，维和人员的职责远不止监督停火协议的落实。他们可以帮助保护平民、维持社会秩序、遣返难民和重建基础服务。中国已经成为联合国安理会常任理事国中最大的维和部队派遣国，完全有能力领导这一维和行动。

关于中国将如何填补美国在中东留下的真空，已经众说纷纭。但这具有误导性。从当前的冲突中可以看出，即使美国想离开，它也无法脱身。

相反，对于中东地区的和平与稳定，中美有共同利益。双方都没有理由反对对方促进和平的努力。值得注意的是，双方在该地区最重要的两个问题上观点相似，即事关巴以冲突的“两国方案”和防止伊朗发展核武器。

1990年10月5日，安全理事会成员就巴勒斯坦的参与问题进行投票（图源：联合国）

加沙正遭受着50年来最严重的暴力冲突，1974年联合国决议首次提出的“两国方案”如今看起来就像乌托邦。因此，中美应携手开展外交活动，将“两国方案”作为指导任何未来路线图的首要原则。

没有政治解决方案，以色列人将永远生活在恐惧之中。而最近发生的暴力事件则表明，为什么巴勒斯坦人应该拥有自己的家园。

中美还必须共同努力，找到解决伊朗核问题僵局的办法。巴以冲突将加剧伊朗对自身安全的担忧，并可能使其更坚定地发展核武器。

在这一问题上，中国的最大优势在于伊朗的信任。面对美国的制裁，中国是唯一向伊朗提供经济援助的大国。中国应向伊朗表明，即使伊朗有权和平利用核能，也绝不能借此名义发展核弹。

这一点必须加以明确。例如，尽管中国与俄罗斯的关系牢固，但中国也明确表示不会容忍核武器的使用。

因此，北京应该告诉德黑兰，即使伊朗成功研制出核弹，这也不会增强其安全。相反，伊朗可能会遭受以色列或以色列和美国联合发动的先发制人的军事打击。发展核武肯定会招致联合国的严厉制裁，就算中国是伊朗最大的贸易伙伴，也必须遵守制裁决议。

拥有核武器的伊朗可能会引发其他地区大国（如沙特阿拉伯和土耳其）发展核武器的连锁反应。就像拥有核武器的朝鲜一样，伊朗可能永远不会成为一个“正常国家”。

在中东这个“敌人的敌人不一定是朋友”的地区，中国的传统中立是有道理的。中国也是唯一与该地区各国友好相处的大国。这是一个巨大的优势。中国应充分利用这一点，使中东地区更加安全。

What is the difference between the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Israel-Hamas conflict? The answer is: no one knows when the former will end, while no one knows when the latter will begin again even if it ends.

Can China help win peace in the Middle East? The question is asked because of the obvious limitations of the other major powers at the moment.

Russia has considerable influence in the Middle East, but given that it is fighting a war of its own, with Iran believed to be one of its arms suppliers, it has little hope of winning Israel’s trust. The EU is deeply polarized and powerless in the face of pro-Palestine Muslim protests across the continent and beyond. The US, being Israel’s staunch ally, has historically provided unconditional support to Israel in all conflicts.

That leaves China. After brokering a historic rapprochement between once-estranged Saudi Arabia and Iran, a more ambitious Beijing had been trying to initiate peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians even before the latest conflict erupted.

Chinese support for the Palestinian cause goes back to the days of Mao Zedong. At the same time, China has developed robust economic ties with Israel starting from the 1980s. Tel Aviv has said it was disappointed that Beijing did not denounce Hamas directly in the wake of the October 7 attacks. But, as foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning put it, Beijing considers itself a friend to both Israel and Palestine.

Since the latest outbreak of violence, Beijing has made phone calls, provided humanitarian aid and sent an envoy to the region. But the best thing China can do – short of stopping Israeli retaliation, a mission impossible even for the UN – is help avert a regional conflagration.

This is possible. Middle Eastern countries have moved closer to China in recent years. In the recent expansion of the China-centered Brics grouping, four Middle Eastern countries – Egypt, Iran, the UAE and Saudi Arabia – joined.

Especially helpful now is if China could use its sway with Iran, a long-term supporter of Hezbollah, to prevent the militant group from opening a war front in Israel’s north. Hezbollah is a more serious threat to Israel than Hamas because of its vast arsenal of missiles and thousands of experienced fighters.

Another area where China could contribute is in peacekeeping. Israel is unlikely to eliminate Hamas with its war, and an Israeli occupation will surely backfire. This means peacekeeping could be needed one day.

Israel has in the past rejected Palestinian calls for peacekeepers in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, but it may have to reconsider this.

The first UN peacekeeping mission was in fact set up to monitor the truce agreement in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Today, peacekeepers are authorised to do much more than observe a ceasefire. They can help protect civilians, maintain civil order, repatriate refugees and rebuild basic services. China, which is already the largest provider of peacekeeping troops among the permanent members of the UN Security Council, is well placed to lead this peacekeeping effort.

Much has been said about how Beijing might fill the vacuum left by Washington in the Middle East. This is misleading. Even if Washington wants to leave, it cannot extricate itself, as can be seen in the current conflict.

Instead, Beijing and Washington have common interests in a stable and peaceful Middle East. Neither side has any reason to oppose efforts by the other to foster peace. Notably, both share similar views on the two most important issues in the region – a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and preventing the Iranians from developing nuclear weapons.

As Gaza grapples with the worst violence in 50 years, the two-state solution first proposed in a 1974 UN resolution looks like utopia now. Therefore, Beijing and Washington should join hands in diplomacy, adopting the two-state solution as the paramount principle guiding any road map forward.

Without a political solution, the Israelis will always live in fear. And the latest violence has brought home why the Palestinians deserve a homeland.

Beijing and Washington must also work together to find a solution to the Iranian nuclear impasse. The Gaza war will exacerbate Iran’s concerns over its own security, and may make it more determined to develop nuclear weapons.

On this issue, China’s biggest advantage is Tehran’s trust. China has been the only major power to give Iran an economic lifeline in the face of US sanctions. China should make it clear to Iran that even if it is entitled to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, Iran must not develop nuclear bombs under its guise.

This distinction must be made. Despite its solid relations with Russia, for example, China also made it crystal clear it would not tolerate the use of nuclear weapons.

Thus Beijing should tell Tehran that even if Iran were to succeed in developing a nuclear bomb, it would not enhance its security. Instead, Iran might suffer a pre-emptive military strike by Israel, or Israel and the US together. It would most certainly invite severe UN sanctions, which China, despite being Iran’s largest trading partner, has to honour.

A nuclear-armed Iran might trigger a chain reaction of other regional powers, such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey, developing nuclear weapons. Like a nuclearised North Korea, Iran would never become a “normal country”.

In a region where my enemy’s enemy is not necessarily my friend, China’s traditional neutrality makes sense. But China is also the only major power that is friendly with the regional players. This is a huge asset. Beijing should make the best of it to make the Middle East safer.

本文系观察者网独家稿件，文章内容纯属作者个人观点，不代表平台观点，未经授权，不得转载，否则将追究法律责任。关注观察者网微信guanchacn，每日阅读趣味文章。