China’s top diplomat voiced hope Thursday for more stable relations with the United States after months of turbulence as he paid a rare trip to Washington to prepare a potential visit by President Xi Jinping.

President Joe Biden has invited Xi to San Francisco to participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, but he has also stood firm on China in the run-up, keeping up a stream of targeted sanctions and staunchly backing US allies in disputes with Beijing.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi began by meeting Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who told his guest that he looked forward to “constructive conversations” that will include a dinner and more formal talks.

Wang told Blinken, who paid a visit to Beijing in June, that China wanted to “reduce misunderstanding.”

“We seek to expand cooperation that will benefit both sides so that we can stabilize US-China relations and return them to the track of healthy, stable and sustainable development,” Wang said.

Acknowledging that differences will still come up, Wang said that China hoped to respond “calmly, because we are of the view that what is right and what is wrong is not determined by who has the stronger arm or the louder voice.”

On Friday, Wang will speak at the White House with National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan. No meeting has been announced with Biden, but an encounter is widely expected after Xi received Blinken in Beijing.

US officials have repeatedly spoken of creating “guardrails” with China to prevent worst-case scenarios and have sought, without success, to restore contact between the two militaries.

“We’re going to compete with China (in) every way according to the international rules — economically, politically, in other ways. But I’m not looking for conflict,” Biden said Wednesday as he welcomed Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

Biden also warned China of US treaty obligations to the Philippines, which said that Chinese vessels deliberately hit Manila’s boats in dispute-rife waters — an account contested by Beijing.

Tensions have been particularly high over Taiwan, the self-ruling democracy claimed by Beijing which over the past year has launched major military exercises in response to actions by US lawmakers.

China’s defense ministry on Thursday accused Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party of pushing the island toward a “dangerous situation of war.”

– What are ‘stable’ ties? –

Robert Daly, director of the Wilson Center’s Kissinger Institute on China and the United States, said Wang will likely seek assurances that the Biden administration will not “embarrass” Xi if he comes to San Francisco, either through harsh new policies or public comments.

“They would like to have a smooth glide path and then a smooth exit from the meeting,” he said.

Daly said the two powers had very different views on what “stable” ties mean, with the United States having no intention of changing course from viewing China as a threat and applying pressure.

“By stabilization, we mean that we want to be able to do that without greatly increasing the chance of conflict,” Daly said.

“The Chinese view is that stabilization would mean America ceasing this relentless stream of provocations and insults such that China is free to focus on its extremely weak domestic economy,” he said.

The Biden administration in recent months has tightened export curbs on chips to China, stepped up military support for Taiwan and issued sanctions targeting individual Chinese over support for Iran’s drone program and over production of chemicals that make fentanyl, the painkiller behind an addiction epidemic in the United States.

Biden has also championed alliances in the face of China’s rise. He has forged a new three-way military alliance with Australia and Britain and promoted the “Quad” with Australia, India and Japan.

The United States and China have also traded barbs over the conflict in the Middle East, where Biden has been Israel’s foremost ally.

The diplomacy with China comes as the United States enters an election season in which Biden’s predecessor Donald Trump, who is seeking to return to the White House, has made hawkish criticism of Beijing a signature policy.

A Pakistan High Court on Thursday admitted former three-time Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s appeal against his conviction in two corruption cases, his lawyer said.

The decision will allow Nawaz Sharif to contest his sentences, which have been pending since his ouster as premier in 2017, in the High Court.

The court has admitted the appeals, which is a way forward to fight against the convictions, his lawyer, Amjad Pervaiz, said.

Nawaz Sharif returned home from self-imposed exile last week after being granted permission to travel to London in 2019 to receive medical treatment while serving a 14-year prison sentence for corruption.

He was granted protective bail earlier this week until Oct. 26, preventing his arrest. The court did not give a fresh ruling on the bail decision.

While he cannot run for, or hold public office, until the conviction is overturned, his party says he aims to become prime minister for a fourth time.

It is a step toward ending the injustice, Nawaz Sharif’s party spokesperson Marriyum Aurangzeb said.

War between Israel and Palestinian forces since Hamas group’ October 7 assault have created a huge and rising death count – and accusations of war crimes – on both sides.

The war falls under a complex international system of justice that has emerged since World War Two. Even if states say they are acting in self-defence, the rules of armed conflict apply to all participants in a war.

WHAT LAWS GOVERN THE CONFLICT?

Internationally accepted rules of armed conflict emerged from the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which have been ratified by all UN member states and supplemented by rulings at international war crimes tribunals.

A series of treaties governs the treatment of civilians, soldiers and prisoners of war in a system collectively known as the “Law of Armed Conflict” or “International Humanitarian Law”. It applies to government forces and organised armed groups, including Hamas militants.

WHAT ACTS COULD VIOLATE WAR CRIMES LAW?

New York-based Human Rights Watch cited as possible war crimes the deliberate targeting of civilians, indiscriminate rocket attacks, and the taking of civilians as hostages by Palestinian armed groups, as well as the Israeli counter-strikes in Gaza that killed hundreds of Palestinians.

The taking of hostages, murder and torture are explicitly banned under the Geneva Conventions, while Israel’s response could also be subject to a war crimes investigation.

In response to the Hamas violence, Israel put Gaza, home to 2.3 million people, under siege and launched by far the most powerful bombing campaign in the 75-year-old history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, destroying whole neighbourhoods.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres pleaded on Tuesday for civilians to be protected, voicing concern about “clear violations of international humanitarian law” in Gaza.

WHAT DO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS SAY?

The overarching goal of the Geneva Conventions and thus international humanitarian law is to protect civilians in wartime and minimize suffering in war.

Under the laws of armed conflict combatants include members of state armed forces, military and volunteer forces and non-state armed groups.

A siege can be considered a war crime if it targets civilians, rather than a legitimate means to undermine Hamas’ military capabilities, or if found to be disproportionate.

Directly targeting civilians or civilian objects is strictly forbidden under the laws of armed conflict. However there are instances in which otherwise civilian objects can become legitimate military targets.

Even then, attacks on military objectives have to be proportional, meaning they must not lead to excessive loss of civilian life or damage to civilian objects.

Proportionality is not a numbers game where count of civilian casualties on one side is compared to the other, rather the loss of civilian life should be proportionate to the direct and concrete military advantage expected from that specific attack.

WHICH INSTITUTIONS CAN TRY ALLEGED WAR CRIMES?

The first in line to try alleged war crimes are local jurisdictions, in this case courts in Israel and the Palestinian territories.

If alleged Palestinian perpetrators of atrocities in Israel and all alleged perpetrators of crimes on the occupied Palestinian territories are not brought to justice at home, the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague is the only international legal organ able to bring charges.

The ICC’s founding Rome Statute gives it legal authority to investigate alleged crimes on the territory of its members or by their nationals, when domestic authorities are “unwilling or unable” to do so.

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE ICC?

The International Criminal Court (ICC), the world’s permanent war crimes tribunal, opened in The Hague in 2002. It has jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in its 123 member states or committed by its nationals.

Many of the world’s major powers are not members, including China, the United States, Russia, India and Egypt. The ICC recognises Palestine as a member state, while Israel rejects the court’s jurisdiction and does not formally engage with it.

With a limited budget and staff, ICC prosecutors are already investigating 17 cases ranging from Ukraine and Afghanistan to Sudan and Myanmar.

The ICC has had an ongoing investigation into allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in the occupied Palestinian territories since 2021.

It has not issued any arrest warrants.