US Secretary of State Blinken ended his visit to Israel on the 19th and is currently visiting Egypt. This is Blinken's ninth trip to the Middle East since the new round of Palestinian-Israeli conflict broke out on October 7 last year. As a staunch ally of Israel, Blinken visited

US Secretary of State Blinken ended his visit to Israel on the 19th and is currently visiting Egypt. This is Blinken's ninth trip to the Middle East since the new round of Palestinian-Israeli conflict broke out on October 7 last year. As a staunch ally of Israel, Blinken visited the Middle East this time and declared that the ceasefire negotiations in Gaza have reached a "decisive moment." Is this really the case? What's holding back negotiations? Blinken visits the Middle East for the ninth time, why does the role of the United States as mediator raise questions? Let’s take a look at the observation report just sent back by the reporter in front of the main station.

Blinken said Israel has accepted the new US ceasefire proposal

Headquarters reporter Wang Yin: On the 19th local time, US Secretary of State Blinken, who was visiting Israel, met with Israeli President Herzog, Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Minister of Defense. Galante. After intensive talks, the United States and Israel once again released positive signals of reaching a ceasefire agreement. For example, Netanyahu called the meeting with Blinken "positive and in a harmonious atmosphere"; Blinken also claimed that Israel had accepted the latest US proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza and the release of detainees, and called on Hamas to do the same response.

Hamas said Blinken’s remarks were a new ploy by the United States

Headquarters reporter Wang Yin: In response, the Hamas Media Office issued a statement on the same day saying that Blinken’s remarks were a new ploy by the United States to circumvent July 2 Hamas and Israel have reached an agreement. The statement also said that this new proposal was modified to benefit the Israeli side, and then the Israeli side announced its acceptance of the proposal and said it was waiting for Hamas's agreement. This was an attempt by the United States to shift the pressure away from the Israeli side and put it on Hamas. Responsibility for the eventual failure of the negotiation. The statement also stated that everything Blinken did was to give Israel more opportunities and time to carry out killings.

The United States is "biased" and the ceasefire negotiations in Gaza are hardly optimistic.

Headquarters reporter Wang Yin: Since a new round of large-scale Palestinian-Israeli conflict broke out on October 7 last year, this is Blinken's ninth trip to the Middle East to carry out the so-called of mediation and mediation. Nearly every time Blinken claimed he was there to ease regional tensions, but each time he also emphasized America's commitment to Israel's security. This kind of "bias" behavior has caused dissatisfaction from Hamas. Regarding Blinken's latest visit to Israel, senior Hamas official Osama Hamdan said that the US proposal is not a request to Hamas. What was proposed is not something Hamas agrees with. So although U.S. President Biden claimed that "we are now closer to a ceasefire agreement than ever before," the actual situation is that after the low-level Israeli delegation returned to Israel from negotiations in Cairo on the 19th, sources revealed that because of the authorization Limited, no progress has been made in finalizing the details this time. The result is that more negotiations and discussions will be arranged in the future. "Everything seems to be a waste of time." Therefore, it does not seem that optimistic whether the mediators can finally reach a ceasefire and personnel exchange agreement in the Gaza Strip at the meeting originally scheduled to be held in Cairo before this weekend.

The United States is the largest supplier of weapons to Israel

Although Blinken has stated during this trip that he hopes to promote a ceasefire in Gaza, in fact, the United States has been supporting Israel militarily and continues to provide Israel with large amounts of weapons. This also leaves little hope for a ceasefire.

According to statistics and forecasts by the Council on Foreign Relations at the end of May 2024, since the founding of Israel in 1946, the United States has provided a total of approximately US$310 billion in economic and military support to Israel, and military support accounts for about three-quarters. This number far exceeds that of other Middle Eastern countries such as Egypt, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

The United States provides an average of more than 3 billion US dollars in military support to Israel every year, and in the past 20 years, almost all US support has been concentrated in the military field. Since the outbreak of a new round of Palestinian-Israeli conflict on October 7 last year, the military support provided by the United States to Israel has increased sharply. By the end of May this year, the total value of newly approved military support provided by the United States to Israel had reached US$12.5 billion.

From Israel’s perspective, its military power mainly relies on the United States. 78% of the military equipment imported by Israel comes from the United States. This number also exceeds that of other Middle Eastern countries such as Egypt, Iraq, and Kuwait.

Jeremy Konindyk, a former senior U.S. government official and president of the International Refugee Organization, said that the United States provides Israel with an "extraordinary amount" of military equipment, which "strongly demonstrates that without this level of U.S. support, Israeli military operations are unsustainable." ".

Expert Interpretation | Only cares about hegemony and self-interest. The United States is the key source of the Palestinian-Israeli problem

The new round of Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been postponed to this day, and there is still no sign of stopping. On the one hand, the United States verbally supports the ceasefire between Palestine and Israel, but in fact it still "extrapolates" and is difficult to win people's trust. Why does the United States show such contradictions? Let’s listen to the interpretation of Diao Daming, deputy director of the Center for American Studies at Renmin University of China.

Diao Daming, deputy director of the American Studies Center at Renmin University of China: Since the outbreak of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the United States has obviously shown completely contradictory duality. On the one hand, under widespread pressure from the international community, it nominally demands a ceasefire between Palestine and Israel; on the other hand, it continues to provide weapons and support to Israel in action. This approach by the United States is tantamount to adding fuel to the fire and cannot fundamentally solve any problem. On the contrary, it is one of the root causes of the continued delay of the problem. Behind the duality of the United States is the common result of its contradictory pursuit of hegemony and self-interest and the fragmentation of domestic political contradictions in the United States. On the one hand, the United States itself claims to maintain the so-called international order, but it also knows very well that its most important ally in the Middle East is Israel. Therefore, in order to safeguard its hegemonic interests, it must unscrupulously defend Israel's interests in the Middle East and delay the chaos in the Middle East. situation and create a humanitarian crisis; on the other hand, politicians from both parties in the United States are under election pressure and do not dare to offend the influential Christian evangelicals and Jewish groups in the United States. It is fundamentally impossible to change their attitude toward Israel. Thoroughly supported. This dilemma caused by the special interests of the two parties in the United States has directly led to the contradictions in relevant U.S. policies. It must be noted that for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the United States is not the solver of the problem, but a key source of the problem and bears an inescapable responsibility.