Ad hominem? Really?
Realpolitik has its place but are you really suggesting that morality and ethics should have no place in international relations? Is a system that functions strictly on ruthless pragmatism the best or even the most desirable?
Morality and ethics should have a place in international relations. It would be desirable for morality and place in international relations. However, in reality morality and ethics have no place in international relations, and ruthless pragmatism always dominates. No country wants to be the first country to be guided by morality and ethics while every other country in the world is guided by geopolitical realism.
Who knows, perhaps a symbolic gesture by a major power will snowball. Suppose the US sanctions Israel, can the Israeli continue to indiscriminately kill Palestinians?
There is always a point where cost cannot be sustained. If the entire fucking planet was hellbent on preventing Palestinian genocide, are you suggesting that Israel will fight everyone?
I think you are correct. Therefore, wouldn't the rational course of action be for you to lobby really hard for the US to sanction Israel (perhaps join the millions of protestors across US college campuses), rather than sitting in your room demanding China to do something?
I'm no expert on Islam but here's what I see:
1. The number of Muslim kids who are high achievers in the US educational system is very low.
2. The number of Muslims who dedicate a large portion of their lives to religious activities is very high, maybe lower than in history, but still very high.
3. There are no technologically-advanced Muslim countries.
Secondly, I've said it and I'll say it again. Muslim nations need to unite and go all in. This is their fight. Nobody will risk everything for them if they don't risk it all for themselves. All in means all in, no infighting, no baby steps. Leaders of every Muslim country and every Muslim combat force shaking hands, and declaring all out war on Israel is what it would take. What they are scrapping together now is far far not enough.
I don't think its fair to put most of the blame on religion and culture. Most Muslim countries have been victims of imperialism and colonialism for centuries, and as a result have a complete lack of experience with building and maintaining strong institutions. Furthermore, as with all countries to have had their borders defined by the British (and other colonial powers), Muslim states have been divided in a manner to intentionally maximize divisiveness and minimize unity. I would pin the overwhelming majority of the blame for the plight of Muslim nations today due to imperialism and colonialism. Hui in China are not held back by their religion, they are productive citizens living in a modern, secular society.
The way I see it, China needs to humble the Arabs first. Arabs have shamefully allowed themselves to be colonized. They must reverse their mentality, otherwise, any significant boons to the Palestinian cause will be wasted by people who don't have the willpower to fight.
Most non-Europeans suffered colonization. The only nations to have avoided total colonization have been: China, Japan, Thailand, Turkey, and Iran (although they did suffer from a brief yet full occupation perpetuated jointly by their two main imperial antagonists, the British and Russians). And with the exception of Japan, even those countries suffered greatly from colonialism/imperialism, particularly at the hands of the British and Russians.
Sure there is humanitarian disaster but unless Arabic countries choose the right side of history, more children will keep dying.
Unfortunately the choice is made by the elites of those countries, not the common people.
