The Japanese killed 35 million people in China in the 14 years from 1931 to 1945 (http://www.china.org.cn/china/2015-07/15/content_36061881.htm), but we established diplomatic ties with them in 1972 when Mao Zedong was still around.
In the joint-statement of 1972 is this line: https://www.mfa.gov.cn/web/gjhdq_676201/gj_676203/yz_676205/1206_676836/1207_676848/197209/t19720929_269810.shtml
（五）中华人民共和国政府宣布：为了中日两国人民的友好，放弃对日本国的战争赔偿要求。
Or in English from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/China-Japan-Relations/2013-09/25/content_16993227.htm
- The Government of the People’s Republic of China declares that in the interest of the friendship between the Chinese and the Japanese peoples, it renounces its demand for war reparation from Japan.
How did you think Chinese people reacted when China renounced the demands for war reparations!
On Lemmygrad I hesitate to comment on the two-state solution for Palestine, because the comments I get here from posting China’s position on it are very “left-leaning” (left-adventurism, not yet ultra-left). Yes I would prefer if Palestine could reclaim all its land “from the river to the sea”, I like the idea but I do not support it as a solution. Why do I support a two-state solution? My comments on it from this post (https://lemmygrad.ml/post/2764916):
A one-state solution for Palestine will still result in conflict between Palestinians and Israelis, the current Israeli colonialism in Palestine will just turn into Israeli separatism from a single Palestinian state.
I think that as long as the American imperialists are still supporting Israel, they won’t “make peace” with Palestine. A two-state solution is a compromise in the event that the US stops giving support.
Korea is an existing example of a two-state solution waiting to be resolved by the north side, they also separated about the same time as Palestine. I suspect that after implementing a two-state solution, Palestine will get the same treatment as Korea or Cuba by the US with sanctions or embargoes.
There’s also China’s friendliness towards Henry Kissinger as exemplified by the Chinese ambassador’s attendance at his 100th birthday party, and by Kissinger’s visit to China where Xi met with him and calls him an “old friend of Chinese people”, which I won’t comment on.
As humans we have our own thoughts and emotions about certain topics, but Marxists should not be content with idealist approaches to resolving problems.
The two state solution would, IMO, would not last. And I think China knows that, and also knows that it would eventually end in Palestine’s favour, which is why they advocate for it.
In a two-state solution, Israel would get propped up by the US for as long as it’s beneficial and affordable to the US. Considering:
a) Israel’s ability to bomb and terrorize with impunity would be severely curtailed by any peace deal,
b) US economic might is on a continuing downward decline, and
c) Unfettered by Israeli blockade, the Global South, Belt & Road, BRICS etc. would be able to throw their support behind Palestinian redevelopment, development and prosperity, and the NATO hegemony would be under pressure to make Israel competitive with that. And they’d have to throw money at it knowing they won’t be able to keep up.
The US would be looking for excuses to withdraw support pretty much immediately. Any two-state solution that frees the Palestinian territories from Israeli occupation and suppression will look like a stalemate on paper, but it would completely curtail Israel’s strategic usefulness to the US, and the US will throw it under the bus like it does every other puppet-ally that outlives its usefulness.
And I think the US and Israel know this as well. Depending on the terms, the US would see the two-state solution as effectively cutting their losses with Israel, while Israel would see it as doom. So for China, pushing for a two-state solution has the additional benefit of driving a wedge between Israel and the US, in addition to the benefits an actual peace would create.