When the U.S. and Israel launched attacks on Iran, the world watched to see China's reaction, but Beijing chose a path of careful observation rather than direct involvement.
Initially, China remained silent for several hours after the strikes. When it finally issued a statement, it expressed being "highly concerned" and urged for an immediate cessation of hostilities, advocating for a return to dialogue. The following day, China's Foreign Minister reiterated this stance, condemning the attacks as unacceptable and emphasizing the need for further negotiations.
While there was no indication of China directly intervening militarily – a prospect that wouldn't be realistic anyway – this approach mirrors its actions in other recent global conflicts. As an analyst from the International Crisis Group, William Yang, pointed out, China tends to condemn the use of force while strategically staying on the sidelines to safeguard its own long-term interests. This time, those interests include a significant upcoming visit from U.S. President Donald Trump to Beijing, anticipated around early April.
Why is China abstaining from the conflict?
Despite its rapidly growing military capabilities and past military drills with Iran, China's primary focus remains on defending its immediate regional interests, particularly concerning Taiwan and the South China Sea. While China has demonstrated a willingness to engage in Middle Eastern diplomacy when opportunities arise, such as brokering the 2023 rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia, it views past U.S. military engagements in places like Afghanistan and Iraq as cautionary tales. William Yang further elaborated, "China is reluctant to project military power beyond its immediate periphery and it is also unwilling to play the role of security guarantor in unstable regions like the Middle East."
This reluctance to engage militarily extends to other global hotspots. For instance, China has offered diplomatic and economic backing to Russia and Venezuela but has avoided any military involvement in Ukraine or Latin America.
Craig Singleton, a senior China fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, suggests that China's position on the sidelines highlights the limitations of its influence in global geopolitics. He stated, "Beijing’s response has been predictably restrained, underscoring China’s limited ability to shape events once hard power is in motion. Beijing can signal unease; however, it cannot meaningfully deter or influence U.S.-Israeli military action."
The U.S. relationship holds more weight than ties with Iran.
Analysts believe that China's disapproval of the strikes on Iran is unlikely to jeopardize its relationship with the United States or the planned meeting between President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping. George Chen, a partner at The Asia Group, explained that for Chinese leaders, the relationship with the U.S. is paramount across various critical areas, including trade, the economy, and the sensitive issue of Taiwan. He added, "U.S.-China relations are already complicated enough for President Trump and Xi to handle. Adding Iran to the mix won’t be something that both sides are keen to do." While a postponement of the Trump visit is a possibility, it's not considered the most probable outcome.
Energy security concerns extend beyond Iranian oil.
Although China is a major importer of Iranian oil, its primary concern is overall energy security, which has led to the development of alternative sources. What truly worries Beijing is the potential for escalating oil prices and disruptions to its access to oil and natural gas from the broader Middle East region.
Last year, China imported approximately 1.4 million barrels of oil per day from Iran, accounting for about 13% of its total seaborne oil imports, according to Kpler. However, Kpler estimates that there is enough oil already in transit to cover China's needs for an additional four to five months. This buffer would provide China's independent refineries with the time needed to adjust and secure alternative supplies, with discounted Russian oil being a prime option, according to Muyu Xu, a senior analyst at Kpler.
Singleton further noted that China has been diligently diversifying its energy supplies and building up its reserves over the years. "The loss of Iranian oil appears marginal, not material, at least in the short-term," he observed.
Of greater concern to China is any attempt by Iran to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial maritime chokepoint, or any attacks on liquefied natural gas facilities in the Gulf states. This was underscored when QatarEnergy, a significant supplier, halted its liquefied natural gas production following attacks on its facilities.
Why China is unlikely to arm Iran.
Analysts cite several reasons why China would refrain from sending arms to Iran to aid in a conflict with the U.S. Muhammad Zulfikar Rakhmat, a researcher at the Center of Economic and Law Studies in Indonesia, stated, "Tangible military aid, if any, would be limited to existing long-term defense trade arrangements rather than rapid battlefield support, and it would be constrained by Beijing’s interest in avoiding direct confrontation with the U.S. and its allies."
Interestingly, China has previously criticized the U.S. for supplying arms to Ukraine, arguing that it prolongs conflicts. While it's acknowledged that Iran's missile program incorporates Chinese technology, James M. Dorsey, an adjunct senior fellow at Nanyang Technological University, predicts that China will prioritize caution over providing any missiles to Iran's military, stating, "What China wants is this to end."
What are your thoughts on China's measured response? Do you believe its focus on economic and diplomatic ties over military intervention is the right approach in such volatile situations? Share your opinions in the comments below!
