Yesterday diplomatic talks began between Lebanon and Israel. In a few days, official contacts between Iran and the US should resume. Why does China support Iran, abdicating a mediation role that it should have as a superpower?
Regarding Iran, China has so far been fairly neutral. Unlike with Ukraine, Gaza, or Venezuela, Beijing has not taken a clear position. Certainly, today there are accusations reported by the Financial Times that Chinese satellites helped identify targets for Iranian bombings in the region. However, Beijing seems to say these are commercial satellites, perhaps hiding behind a fig leaf. It would be a different matter if China supplied shoulder-fired anti-aircraft launchers. Certainly, there are ancient ties with Iran that Beijing finds hard to change. Regarding mediation, it is not clear what role China has played so far in reaching the current truce, but probably there has been some, perhaps also alongside a role from India. Naturally, the coming days will be crucial. If China is providing military assistance, even indirectly, to Iran, things could become more delicate. This is a very new situation for China, which is somehow learning on the fly how to move. If we want to be positive, we can say Beijing has improved its position compared to past clashes. If we want to be pessimistic, we can say it has not yet learned enough the art of neutrality. We must wait for the evolution of events at least until the Beijing summit between the United States and China.
Will Beijing pay a price for its support to Putin and Iran?
It depends on whether China will step back from these recent reported aids to Iran, or if Beijing will continue. Here there are two contexts: one long-term, the other short-term. The long-term is that for at least 15 years China, gradually at first and then increasingly faster, is no longer “in fashion.” In the short term, China has accelerated this perception by taking sides on international issues that so far have overall been losing. It should then think long-term about how to improve its perception abroad and mainly in the West, its main commercial client and – whether it likes it or not – the major driver of international public opinion. This is not just a matter of propaganda, but of its own position in the global context. China says it does not want to oppose America, but often it does not position itself with America. Unfortunately, the objective situation, with ongoing wars, makes this position increasingly difficult and unbalanced. Certainly, European countries also have problems with America under Donald Trump’s presidency, but it is very different because the problems are essentially with Trump, but not with America per se. For China, perhaps it is the opposite. There are more problems with America per se and perhaps fewer with the person of Trump. This position, if so, could be very problematic beyond any agreement Beijing will manage to extract from Trump.
Why did Chinese diplomacy fail in the attempt to bring Saudi Arabia and Iran closer?
I believe that was not an initiative of Beijing, but rather of some Gulf countries and Saudi Arabia to try to improve the situation with Iran while America was busy with other matters. The Gaza issue, clearly supported by Iran, the attack by Lebanese Hezbollah against Israel, also supported by Iran, broke the spell between Saudis and Iranians. Arab and Muslim countries, which had previously hoped to reconcile with Iran, felt threatened by the Shiite militias supported by Tehran, and therefore chose to move even closer to Israel and the United States. China radically misread the situation. In fact, it initially thought the Muslim world would unite against Israel and America. Today, any military support from China to Iran risks alienating Beijing’s relations with the entire Muslim world, which is distrustful or hostile towards Tehran’s ayatollahs.
How are Trump’s erratic behaviors assessed in Beijing and what countermeasures have been adopted?
My impression is that in Beijing they are indifferent to Trump’s sudden changes of direction. The Chinese believe in long-term strategy and are skeptical about momentary choices. In Western terms, we could say the Chinese believe that tactics without strategy is just noise before defeat. So they follow Trump’s evolution but do not seem persuaded by it.
What do you expect (and hope for) regarding the upcoming summit between President Xi Jinping and the President of the United States?
I don’t think there will be a major agreement. What could happen is a trade truce that gives some calm to the markets worldwide, at least until the midterm elections in America. The Americans hope to divide the agenda between thorny issues, which could be discussed even if not fully resolved, and general topics where the two countries could find more common ground, for example the fight against crime and drug trafficking. A strong question mark should be Iran and Hormuz. It will perhaps be crucial to see what the Americans gain from China’s stance on Iran. It could be a banana peel or a stepping stone to advance the bilateral relationship.
