China adopts a sharply critical view of US military actions in and around the Palestinian territories, such as the proposed floating military pier in the Gaza envelope. This comes alongside President Trump’s plan to establish an international military base in Gaza, housing 5,000 US troops and surrounded by 26 observation towers, as has been announced. Washington claims this project is for humanitarian purposes, aimed at delivering aid to the Gaza Strip, while China views it as part of a larger policy designed to contain the influence of other powers and prolong the conflict rather than resolve it. The most prominent aspect of this Chinese perspective is its skepticism regarding the stated humanitarian objectives of building a US military base in the Gaza envelope. China believes that US military projects, such as the floating pier or plans to establish military bases in the Gaza envelope, are merely a cover for continuing the war in the Gaza Strip and maintaining a direct US military presence. Beijing emphasizes that land routes are the only effective and sustainable solution for delivering aid. With China’s firm rejection of foreign military intervention: Chinese state media considers any foreign military intervention, including the construction of military bases, a “provocative and extremely dangerous” step. This is especially true given that the US military fortifications and bases are planned, according to Chinese intelligence and relevant authorities, in a barren area of plains south of the Gaza Strip as part of the US-brokered International Peace Council plan. Washington has invited a small group of bidding companies international construction firms with experience in conflict zones, who have already visited the site, raising suspicions about both their intentions and those of Washington.
Here, Chinese intelligence, military, defense, and security agencies question the role assigned to the International Peace Council, which Washington agreed upon with the participation of several countries. This skepticism stems from the fact that Chinese intelligence and relevant authorities obtained a clause in the agreement establishing the (International Peace Council), sponsored by Washington. China discovered that the council’s primary objective is to eliminate Hamas’s underground tunnels. One of the documents in the agreement stipulates that: “the companies contracted, along with the construction contractor, will conduct a geophysical survey of the site to identify any voids, tunnels, or large underground cavities at each stage”. Chinese intelligence circles believe this clause specifically refers to the extensive network of tunnels built by Hamas in Gaza, which Washington and Tel Aviv seek to destroy and obliterate in order to achieve a decisive victory over Hamas.
China believes that such American steps to establish military bases in the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian territories themselves will never bring peace, but will instead deepen hatred and regional tensions. Therefore, Chinese think tanks specializing in the Middle East and military studies have developed a strategic vision for the international conflict in the Gaza Strip and the region. Chinese analysts view the American military presence in Gaza as part of a broader strategy to counter China’s rise in the Middle East. China uses its pro-Palestinian stance to bolster its leadership among developing nations that sympathize with the Palestinian cause and oppose “Western hegemony”. While adhering to a political solution, Beijing consistently affirms that the only way to resolve the conflict is through the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital. It believes that American militarization hinders the prospects for a two-state solution and exacerbates existing international polarization. In addition to China’s persistent monitoring of US logistical and military capabilities in Gaza and the region, China, from a military-technical perspective, observes the success or failure of US logistical projects, such as the US floating military pier project in the Gaza envelope, to draw lessons about the US military’s ability to operate in distant hostile environments. This could have implications for potential conflicts in other areas, such as Taiwan, which falls within China’s direct sphere of influence.
The Chinese perspective on the US floating pier project in Gaza (which began in March 2024 and officially ended in July 2024) and subsequent plans to build military bases can be summarized as a clear Chinese skepticism of the stated humanitarian intentions, viewing them as merely a cover for broader geopolitical and military objectives in the region. Here, the details of the Chinese position on any potential US military projects in the Palestinian territories, specifically in and around the Gaza Strip, according to recent developments up to February 2026, are, as follows: (Chinese Diplomatic Criticism of the 2024 Floating Pier Project): China, through its official channels and analysts, expressed deep doubts about the feasibility of the floating pier erected by the US military, along with (Chinese skepticism about its effectiveness itself): Beijing criticized the expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars on a technically inoperable maritime pier (functioning for only 20 days out of two months), while land crossings remained closed, describing it as a “sideshow” by the US and an “expensive and irresponsible experiment”. China declared that (land routes take priority): According to the statement by China’s ambassador to the United Nations “Fu Cong”, the massive investment in the pier proves that land routes remain the only viable and sustainable means of delivering aid, and that a maritime solution is not a substitute for them.
Therefore, the Chinese position rejecting that American “control” and the plans for military bases (2025-2026) on the Gaza envelope area and its surroundings came, especially with the emergence of reports and public Chinese statements about the intention of the American administration (during Trump’s era in 2025) to build military bases or “take over” the administration of the Gaza Strip. Therefore, the Chinese response came firmly, through: (rejecting “taking over” Gaza): The Chinese Foreign Ministry announced in February 2025 its categorical rejection of any plans aimed at the United States controlling the Gaza Strip or the forced displacement of Palestinians. With China’s emphasis on the principle of “Palestinians governing Palestine”, China asserts that this principle is the fundamental basis for any governance in Gaza after the conflict. It rejects any forced change to the status of the Strip that could lead to “new chaos”. This is a clear Chinese reference to its rejection of the US military base in the Gaza envelope region. Beijing views massive US military investments, such as the construction of a base in the Gaza envelope at a cost of half a billion dollars, as part of a broader US strategy to bolster its direct presence in the conflict and expand the militarization of maritime routes in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea.
Herein lies the strategic dimension of the Chinese perspective rejecting the establishment of any US military bases or installations in the Gaza envelope. Beijing sees these US moves (the pier or bases) as serving objectives that extend beyond Gaza, such as the broader US plan to enhance maritime dominance in the region. China believes that the continued US military presence in the Eastern Mediterranean aims to strengthen control over shipping lanes amidst Red Sea tensions. With the aim of (providing military lessons to Beijing): This means that the Chinese military is observing the technical shortcomings of the American floating platform in the Mediterranean Sea, in order to draw military and technical lessons regarding the logistical challenges its forces might face in any future amphibious landing operations, such as the Taiwan scenario.
Through the preceding military analysis, we observe the extent to which China views these American projects as a “political tool” intended to buy time for Israel and its ongoing military operations under the pretext of eliminating Hamas, while the true objective is to reinforce the permanent American military presence, rather than offering genuine humanitarian solutions based on a ceasefire and a two-state solution.
