Beijing will pay for backing Iran, Palestinians – Latest News
Conservative: Beijing Will Pay for Backing Iran
China “has for decades promoted itself as a nonjudgmental alternative to the U.S. and the West,” keen doing commerce with anybody. But with the battle within the Persian Gulf, “that posture is now collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions,” contends UK Member of Parliament Tom Tugendhat at The Wall Street Journal. Beijing has “provided Iran with satellite imagery, components and intelligence” to assault targets in Gulf international locations which have “helped Iran destroy” their refineries and docks and even kill civilians. “The Gulf Arab monarchies aren’t naive about great-power politics”; “relationships with China will change.” Across the Arabian Peninsula, “assumptions are already shifting,” and “China is no longer the indispensable partner unburdened by a history of war in the region.”
Israel beat: Palestinians Should Offer a Map
There is ample “proof that over the years Israel would have accepted the two-state solution,” notes Commentary’s Seth Mandel, however no proof “the Palestinian leadership would accept” it. Israel has printed “end-game maps”; the “Palestinian leadership” too needs to be challenged to “produce an acceptable map.” But for now we nonetheless “don’t know if the Palestinians would be willing to end the conflict.” The Oct. 7 assaults had been “aimed at torpedoing negotiations seeking a broad Arab-Israeli peace,” although the “Palestinians could disrupt their own unbroken pattern of rejectionism if they wanted to,” by “saying explicitly” they’re “prepared to consider the conflict resolved” in the event that they obtain “statehood through negotiations with Israel.” This would “put Bibi on the spot” and drive him to make a counteroffer.
Va. journal: Va. Democrats vs. Democracy
Virginia’s referendum on new congressional districts “shows how far our politics have regressed,” argues RealClearPolitics’ Carl Cannon. The transfer, if it stands, will flip the Old Dominion’s delegation of six Democrats and 5 GOPers into one of 10 Democrats and one Republican. “Did voters really know what they were getting?” The referendum’s wording claims it could “restore fairness,” however in reality, “it is not intended within Virginia to restore fairness at all. It’s intended to abrogate fairness.” Indeed, it’s “so egregious and so Orwellian,” it’s unlikely to “pass muster” legally. “If you cared about democracy — which Democrats say they do — you would fight this instead of pushing it.” It’s Democrats, again, “doing what they claim they dislike the most about Trump.”
More From Post Editorial Board
From the proper: The Left’s Break With Reality
“The crazy world of the Left increasingly bears scant resemblance to reality,” marvels American Greatness’ Victor Davis Hanson. In their bizarro world, “Eric Swalwell was a liberal icon” and “occasionally a serial sexual predator.” The Biden years are lionized though his “handlers obliterated the southern border, admitting 10–12 million unvetted aliens.” Democrats need “to impeach Secretary of War Pete Hegseth” and plan “to restart their vendettas to punish their enemies.” James Carville desires to “pack the court,” add “two new blue states” and finish “the Senate filibuster.” Meanwhile, “no Democrat outlines an immigration agenda,” “a way to balance the budget,” “an anti-corruption agenda” or “a new strategic plan abroad.” “Shrieking at Trump demons raging in their collective heads is no way to run a country.”
Mideast desk: Trump’s Iran’s Deal Isn’t Obama’s
At the Free Press, Eli Lake maintains that “any deal that may emerge from Trump’s war on Iran’s nuclear program will be fundamentally different from what the Obama administration negotiated.” Under Obama’s deal, Iran was allowed to keep its nuke amenities “in exchange for time-limited promises” to not weaponize its fissile materials. Now, “even if Iran managed to further enrich the uranium trapped under its facilities,” it “would have a much harder time figuring out how to place that material into a nuclear warhead.” “If [President] Trump fails to get Iran’s regime to accept a nuclear deal, Iran will still be much further away from obtaining the bomb than it ever was under the JCPOA”: “The president has destroyed the nuclear program that Obama legitimized.”
— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
