In a stunning turn of events, the United States has ousted two leaders closely aligned with China within a mere two-month span. But here’s the real question: Why has Beijing responded with little more than rhetorical outrage? Is China’s silence a strategic retreat, or a calculated move in a larger geopolitical game?
Hong Kong/Beijing —
In rapid succession, former US President Donald Trump orchestrated the removal of two of Beijing’s key allies: Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Maduro was captured in a dramatic overnight raid by US special forces in Caracas and is now detained in a New York facility. Khamenei, on the other hand, was assassinated in a daring daylight bombing in Tehran, executed jointly by the US and Israel. But this is the part most people miss: While China has vocally condemned these actions as violations of sovereignty and attempts at regime change, its actual response has been notably restrained.
Beijing’s reaction has been limited to diplomatic protests and expressions of solidarity with Iran, including outreach to Tehran to reaffirm their friendship. Yet, as its geopolitical rival reshapes the rules of engagement, China has largely remained on the sidelines. Why the hesitation?
For Chinese leader Xi Jinping, pragmatism takes precedence. Iran, while a partner, is not among his top priorities. Xi’s focus remains on stabilizing relations with the US, particularly ahead of a planned summit with Trump in Beijing. Experts suggest China may even view Washington’s diversion of military resources away from the Indo-Pacific as a strategic advantage.
But here’s where it gets controversial: Craig Singleton, senior director for China at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, labels China a “fair-weather friend”—vocal in words but reluctant to take risks. “Beijing will speak up at the United Nations but avoid providing significant support to Tehran,” he notes. While China is Iran’s largest oil buyer, its strategic importance to Beijing is often overstated. Military cooperation remains limited, and trade with Gulf states far outweighs that with Iran, as China seeks to balance its Middle Eastern ties.
William Yang, senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, adds, “China sees no benefit in escalating tensions with the US over Iran. Maintaining the trade truce and stability with Washington remains its top priority.” Despite being Iran’s key diplomatic and economic ally, China has consistently avoided direct involvement in its partners’ conflicts, focusing instead on protecting its own interests.
This pattern of restraint was evident during Iran’s conflict with Israel and subsequent US airstrikes, where China offered only verbal support. Yang points out, “China avoids positioning itself as a security guarantor, wary of the pitfalls seen in US interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
Beijing’s relationship with Iran bolsters its energy security and Middle Eastern influence, but it has also cultivated ties with regional rivals like Saudi Arabia. In 2023, China even brokered a rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia, showcasing its balancing act.
However, Washington remains concerned about growing ties between China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea. Last September, leaders from all four nations gathered in Beijing for a military parade, a striking display of unity. Yet, Beijing’s limited support for Iran during recent crises raises questions about its reliability as a partner in times of adversity.
And this is the part most people miss: While China has elevated Iran’s global standing through initiatives like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, its actions during crises suggest a reluctance to commit fully. “Others may rightly question whether Beijing will abandon them in times of need,” notes political scientist Ja Ian Chong.
Despite this, analysts agree that Tehran will likely maintain ties with China for economic reasons. Zhu Zhaoyi, director of the Middle East Institute at Peking University, highlights a structural opportunity for China: “US involvement in Middle Eastern conflicts diverts resources, reducing its capacity to pressure China in the Indo-Pacific.” Additionally, a prolonged campaign against Iran could deplete US weapons supplies, with China’s ban on rare earth exports for military use further complicating Washington’s efforts.
Yet, short-term disruptions, particularly in energy, are inevitable. Iran’s crude exports to China account for 13% of its total seaborne oil intake, according to Kpler. The energy trade relies on a network of vessels and independent refineries, often using intermediary countries to avoid US sanctions. Despite this, China’s diversified oil supply should mitigate immediate impacts.
A more significant concern for Beijing is prolonged conflict in the region, particularly disruptions to the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping route for oil from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Crude from this region makes up one-third of China’s demand and over 50% of its seaborne imports. Iran’s control over the strait’s northern side, coupled with recent threats to target passing ships, has already halted traffic.
China’s foreign ministry spokeswoman, Mao Ning, emphasized the strait’s importance and called for an immediate ceasefire. “Regional stability serves the global community’s interests,” she stated. However, China’s stockpiles of 1.2 billion barrels of crude—enough for 115 days—provide a buffer against immediate supply shocks.
But here’s the bigger picture: China is likely to use US actions in Iran to portray Washington as a hegemonic power, positioning itself as a champion of non-interference. Some analysts argue that Beijing’s reluctance to provide security guarantees is a calculated strategy, offering flexibility while avoiding overcommitment. However, this approach may embolden aggressive US moves, as warned by Zichen Wang of the Center for China and Globalization.
What do you think? Is China’s restrained response a smart strategic move, or a missed opportunity to assert its global influence? Let us know in the comments below.
