The People’s Republic of China in the Context of American–Israeli Aggression Against Iran

China responds to international challenges, including aggression against Iran, not through the use of force but by means of a long-term strategy grounded in political and economic engagement and the maintenance of mutually beneficial relations, while preserving channels of dialogue with the United States.

On China’s Response to Aggression Against Iran

First and foremost, it is necessary to clarify a sense of perplexion which frequently emerges regarding the nature of China’s response to the evident infringement of its international interests initiated by its principal geopolitical opponent. It should be emphasized that the extremely complex and multifaceted processes accompanying the radical restructuring of the global order cannot be adequately described within the framework of simplified assessments that reduce the matter to the question, “What will our response be?”

It is important to note that the escalation of militaristic rhetoric does not generally tally with traditional Chinese culture, which seeks to achieve victory in conflicts without resorting to military action. In this regard, “culture” is understood as one of the most significant philosophical categories, in which the sphere of responsibility of the state body bearing the same name occupies a secondary place. At the same time, the People’s Republic of China does not deny the importance of the military component as one of the instruments for defending national interests. However, the “rattling of sabres” is initiated primarily in case of a threat to territorial integrity. The Taiwan issue serves as an example, although even here, Beijing gives preference to peaceful means of resolution.

Peaceful methods also play a key role in the international arena, in accordance with the fundamental principles of state-building in China. Thus, the factor of lagging behind the United States in military potential is unlikely to be decisive in Beijing’s current response to challenges to its interests in Iran or Venezuela. China’s strategy is oriented towards the long term, and immediate international problems do not unsettle it.

These aspects must be taken into account when assessing Beijing’s current denials of suspicions concerning the “organization of chip production in Iran for military purposes” or the “presence of a People’s Liberation Army Navy intelligence vessel in the Strait of Hormuz area.” The principal resource employed to facilitate the cessation of yet another military escalation in the strategically important Persian Gulf region lies in China’s deep political and economic involvement in all the ongoing processes there, as well as in the fact that it maintains mutually beneficial relations with all the countries of the region without exception.

China–United States Relations: The Strategy of Playing the Long Game and Current Contacts

In assessing China’s strategy in its relations with the United States, it is important to take into account the factor of “playing the long game.” In this context, Washington’s actions with regard to Venezuela and Iran appear to be little more than “pinpricks.” The motives behind these actions, as always, could be easily clothed in persuasive narratives.

The aim of China’s strategy is not the defeat or total collapse of its principal opponent but the maintenance and development of mutually beneficial trade and economic ties while preserving competition in international politics.

The fact that the functioning of channels of communication remains almost uninterrupted confirms the thesis. The most recent of these was the sixth consultative meeting held on 15–16 March in Paris. As at previous meetings (for example, in Geneva and London), it is likely that the parties discussed the entire range of bilateral issues. The level of the heads of delegation—the Vice Premier of the People’s Republic of China, He Lifeng, and the United States Secretary of the Treasury, S. Bessent—corresponds to the importance of these negotiations.

In particular, the Paris meeting likely addressed a visit by Donald Trump to China for talks with Xi Jinping. When this article was being composed, there was uncertainty remaining around the issue, due to the negative consequences of the aggression against Iran. The outcome of the meeting in Paris was given a positive assessment.

However, the intensifying American–Chinese confrontation in international politics cannot but affect the trade and economic sphere. The latest confirmation of this is the announcement by the Office of the United States Trade Representative of an investigation being initiated into China and a number of other countries under the “unfair trade” provisions of the Trade Act of 1974. Section 301 of this document allows for the imposition of tariff duties of up to 100 per cent on imported goods whose producers are suspected of using “forced labor.” It should come as no surprise that the Ministry of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China has adopted countermeasures.

Contradictory Trends in East Asia: Taiwan as the Epicentre of Tension

Despite the armed conflict in the Middle East being a pressing issue, the People’s Republic of China continues to devote primary attention to the maritime space adjacent to its coastline. Taiwan, as a key factor determining Beijing’s principal foreign policy challenge, is of particular importance in this regard.

The Taiwan issue is also a source of serious disagreement in relations between China and Washington. The approaches of the American administration to this problem display notable nuances, likely reflecting competing interests among different groups both within the American establishment as a whole and within the current administration. Thus, Donald Trump, even during his first presidency, sought to establish certain mutually understood frameworks for interaction with Beijing. He is now credited with delays in the delivery of American weapons to Taiwan—a step that may be interpreted as a rational preparation for a potential meeting with the Chinese leader.

At the same time, the overwhelming majority of members of Congress from both parties demonstrate a directly opposing position on the Taiwan issue. The island is regularly visited by delegations from both chambers of the United States Congress, whose behaviour often appears provocative towards China. In particular, there is open interference in Taiwan’s internal affairs, where Taipei, among other issues, regularly faces the problem of delays in the adoption of the budget, which hinders payment even for weapons systems already received from the United States.

The Taiwan issue also affects the deteriorating state of Japan–China relations. Among recent developments in this regard, China imposed restrictive measures against the prominent Japanese politician Kentaro Furuya, known for his visits to Taiwan and, it is claimed, for his close ties with Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi.

At the end of March, a curious incident occurred: an attempted intrusion into the premises of the Chinese embassy in Tokyo. The “protagonist” of the incident was a young officer of the Japan Self-Defense Forces, who explained to the police that he wished to “express protest” to the Chinese ambassador in connection with what he described as China’s “unfair treatment” of his country. However, the officer’s motives remain unclear, particularly given that he was carrying a dagger with an 18-centimetre blade. While the presence of individuals with unstable mental state cannot be ruled out in any society, in this case, it concerns an officer. The incident itself most likely reflects a deeply rooted routine antipathy between Japanese and Chinese people, which has always existed but has intensified amid the latest deterioration in bilateral relations.

China, as one of the two leading global powers, is compelled to manoeuvre in an exceptionally complex international environment. On the whole, it is managing this rather successfully, although the global costs of the conflict in the Middle East undoubtedly take their toll on Beijing as well.

Vladimir Terekhov, expert on Asia-Pacific region affairs

Follow new articles on our Telegram channel

© New Eastern Outlook