The Israeli conflict has again caused great concern in the international community.

As Hamas announced the ¡°end of the war,¡± the Israeli cabinet also passed a ceasefire, and the Gaza Strip was briefly calmed.

However, there is an undercurrent behind the ceasefire agreement, and the prospect of peace is unclear.

In this context, China¡¯s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Geng Xiaoping, rarely put forward 12 ¡°oppositions¡± at the Sixth Committee of the UN General Assembly, referring directly to the issue of double standards in international rules.

This clear statement not only reflects China's position, but also reflects the deep contradictions in the current international order.

Although an Israeli ceasefire agreement has been reached, the military operation has not been completely stopped.

On the eve of the signing of the agreement, the Israeli militaryly launched airstrikes on the Gaza city's Sabra district, causing at least 40 people to be buried in ruins, while Hamas said more than 70 people were killed.

The casualties and damage caused by the conflict raise doubts about the actual effect of the ceasefire.

At the same time, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza continues to intensify.

United Nations data shows that the conflict has killed thousands of people, displaced hundreds of thousands of people, and medical and living conditions have been extremely harsh.

In this context, China has clearly expressed its firm support for the rule of law.

In his speech, Geng Xiaoping put forward 12 ¡°oppositions¡±, including ¡°on my sole dignity and supremacy of strength¡±, ¡°to bypass the abuse of sanctions and the abuse of force by the Security Council¡±, and ¡°to the exceptionalism and double standards of the country¡±.

Although there is no name in the speech, its contradiction clearly refers to the United States.

The double standards of the United States on the Palestinian-Israeli issue are particularly obvious.

On the one hand, the United States has repeatedly used its veto power to hinder the Security Council from passing ceasefire resolutions on the grounds that it is "in line with regional security interests";

On the other hand, the United States continues to provide military assistance to Israel.

According to data, the United States provides about $3.8 billion in military support to Israel every year, including advanced weapons and defense systems.

This practice of "speaking for peace and acting to promote conflict" not only exacerbates the complexity of the Israeli issue, but also weakens the trust of the international community in the rule of law.

Even more worrying is the US¡¯s selective use of international rules.

For example, Palestine¡¯s application to become a full member of the United Nations is fully in line with the principles of sovereignty of the UN Charter, but the United States vetoed it.

At the same time, international organizations have repeatedly pointed out that Israel's use of U.S. -aided weapons to attack civilians violates international law, but the United States continues to provide support on the grounds of "inability to confirm."

This "small circle rule" is incompatible with the fairness and justice generally recognized by the international community.

In contrast, China¡¯s 12 ¡°oppositions¡± emphasize the fairness of global governance.

The basis of international rule of law is that all countries, regardless of size, should act under the same rules.

This concept of ¡°consult and build and share¡± is a strong response to the current hegemonic logic.

China's position not only safeguards the authority of the international rule of law, but also strives for more say for small and medium-sized countries.

The signing of the ceasefire agreement is only the beginning, and real peace still requires joint efforts by the international community.

China's clear opposition to double standards at the United Nations this time is precisely to safeguard the foundation of the international rule of law.

Only under fair and just international rules can Palestine see hope for statehood and Israel achieve long-term security.

In the future, the international community needs to promote a just solution to the Palestinian-Israeli issue within the framework of the "two-state solution" and avoid allowing hegemonic logic to dominate global governance.