logo
A US attack on Iran would show the limits of China's power

A US attack on Iran would show the limits of China's power

Straits Times21-06-2025
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said China was willing to play 'a constructive role' in de-escalating the conflict. PHOTO: AFP
BEIJING/HONG KONG - When China helped negotiate a peace deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia in 2023, it hailed the breakthrough as a victory for Chinese diplomacy and a sign that the United States' chief geopolitical rival had emerged as a major power broker in the Middle East.
But as President Donald Trump openly ponders deploying US forces to join Israel in attacking Iran, the limits of China's clout in the region are coming into focus.
China has much to lose from a runaway conflict. Half of the country's oil imports move in tankers through the Strait of Hormuz on Iran's southern coast. And Beijing has long counted on Tehran, its closest partner in the region, to push back against American influence.
But despite those strategic interests, China, which has little sway over the Trump administration, is unlikely to come to Iran's defence militarily, especially if the United States gets involved.
'The reality is they don't actually have the capability to insert Chinese forces to defend Iran's installations,' said Mr Zack Cooper, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. 'What they would prefer to do is very quietly provide some material support, some rhetorical support and maybe some humanitarian aid.'
Though China favours stability in the Middle East, it could also gain if the United States gets roped into a prolonged war there, which might divert US troops, ships and other military resources away from Asia.
Whether Mr Trump decides to strike Iran will offer lessons for Beijing that could shape its own geopolitical strategy. China will be trying to understand Mr Trump's approach to foreign policy and his willingness to use force. The outcome could influence Beijing's assessment of whether the United States would come to the defence of Taiwan, the self-governed island that Beijing claims, should China decide to invade it.
Despite China's close relationship with Iran, its rhetoric about the current conflict has been strikingly measured at the highest levels. After its top leader, President Xi Jinping, called for a ceasefire during a call with President Vladimir Putin of Russia on June 19 , a summary of the call released by the Chinese government did not overtly criticise Israel for violating Iran's sovereignty.
Mr Xi also refrained from directly urging the United States not to attack Iran, saying only that the 'international community, especially major powers that have a special influence on the parties to the conflict, should make efforts to promote the cooling of the situation, rather than the opposite.'
When China's top diplomat Wang Yi called his counterpart in Israel, he expressed Beijing's opposition to Israel's attacks, according to the Chinese summary of the call. But he stopped short of saying that China 'condemns' them, as he had in a call with Iran.
In another call, with the foreign minister of Oman, Mr Wang said that 'we cannot sit idly by and watch the regional situation slide into an unknown abyss,' according to a Chinese government statement. But it is unclear what, if any, specific efforts China has made to find a diplomatic solution. In any case, Israel would likely be sceptical of China's neutrality as a mediator because of its alignment with Iran and engagement with Hamas, the Palestinian ally of Iran that attacked Israel in October 2023.
China's efforts, at least in public, have been focused on evacuating more than 1,000 of its citizens from Israel and Iran.
'Beijing is scrambling to keep up with the rapid pace of events and is prioritizing looking after Chinese citizens and assets in the region rather than any sort of broader diplomatic initiative,' said Dr Julian Gewirtz, who was a senior China policy official at the White House and the State Department during the Biden administration.
Discussions of the conflict on China's heavily censored online forums have largely centred on the poor performance of Iran's military and security apparatus, though some participants have noted the limits of China's support for Iran.
Dr Zhu Zhaoyi, a Middle East expert at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing, said in a post that China could not provide Iran with 'unconditional protection' and confront the United States and Israel militarily. He said Beijing could only exert pressure through the United Nations Security Council, of which China is a permanent member.
'The turmoil in the Middle East is both a challenge and a test for China,' Dr Zhu wrote.
China's tempered response resembles that of its like-minded partner, Russia, which has done little more than issue statements of support for Iran, despite having received badly needed military aid from Tehran for its war in Ukraine. Both Beijing and Moscow were also seen as bystanders last year when their shared partner, the Assad regime, was overthrown in Syria.
Their relative absence raises questions about the cohesiveness of what some in Washington have called the 'Axis of Upheaval' – the quartet of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, which have drawn closer diplomatically and militarily around a common opposition to the US-dominated world order.
Of the four nations, only China is deeply embedded in the global economy, which means it has much to lose from turmoil in the Middle East. It buys virtually all of Iran's exported oil, at a discount, using clandestine tanker fleets to evade US sanctions. And its ships depend on safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz to transport additional oil from Gulf states.
Higher energy prices would present another major headache for Beijing, which is trying to turn its sluggish economy around.
Besides energy, Iran provides China with a crucial foothold in the Middle East for advancing its interests and countering the United States, which has tens of thousands of troops across the region. Beijing has cultivated closer ties with Gulf states for the same reasons.
Chinese analysts often argue that Beijing is an attractive mediator in the Middle East because it will not lecture other countries about issues like human rights. 'It's the only major power trusted by rival factions in the region, capable of achieving breakthroughs where the U.S. cannot,' said Dr Wen Jing, a Middle East expert at Tsinghua University in Beijing.
But some Western analysts say China played only a small role in the detente between Iran and Saudi Arabia, toward the end of those negotiations. Washington has also been frustrated by Beijing's reluctance to put pressure on Iran to stop Houthi rebels from attacking ships off the coast of Yemen, except in cases involving Chinese vessels.
That unwillingness to apply pressure on its partners undercuts China's standing in the Middle East, said Ms Barbara Leaf, a former assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs at the State Department who is now a senior adviser at Arnold and Porter, a Washington-based law firm.
'Nobody is saying, 'We better call up Beijing and see what they can do here,' because Beijing has played a purely commercial and economic role,' Ms Leaf said, describing the attitudes of Middle Eastern officials with whom she has spoken over the years.
'They just sort of take it as a given that China is going to look out for China,' she said. NYTIMES
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

As Trump pushes international students away, Asian schools scoop them up
As Trump pushes international students away, Asian schools scoop them up

Straits Times

time4 minutes ago

  • Straits Times

As Trump pushes international students away, Asian schools scoop them up

Yonsei University campus in Seoul, South Korea. The country wants to have 300,000 international students by 2027. SEOUL – For Mr Jess Concepcion, a microbiology student from the Philippines, obtaining a doctorate from a university in the United States had been a dream. It was where most of his academic mentors had studied and done research, and he wanted to follow in their footsteps. But when the United States, under President Donald Trump, started pausing visa interviews during peak season this spring, threatening to deport international students for political speech and slashing funding for academic research, he quickly changed plans. Applications for doctoral programmes take years and have to be tailored to specific schools, so he is aiming for programmes in Switzerland and Singapore instead. 'That uncertainty made me stop in my tracks and choose another country,' Mr Concepcion, 24, said. 'Immigration policy is quite restrictive, and I'm on a different side of the world. So living in that kind of instability that far away isn't healthy for me.' It's a quandary facing many young people around the world. According to the United Nations, 6.9 million people studied outside their home country in 2022. The United States has long attracted the most foreign students, 1.1 million in the 2023-24 academic year. It's too soon to know whether more foreign students will choose not to attend US schools. But warning signs abound. Major international education search platforms, including IDP and Keystone Education Group, have detected a marked decline in student interest in American programmes. Among academic administrators polled by the Institute for International Education this spring, more than usual reported drops in international applications for the coming year. These are not the first signs that American higher education is losing its dominant position. For years, countries in Asia have been strengthening their universities and marketing them to students around the world. With more appealing alternatives, the Trump administration's hostile stance may hasten the decline in US higher education preeminence. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Asia India, Singapore ministers discuss deeper tie-ups in digitalisation, skills, industrial parks Business More seniors remain employed after retirement and re-employment ages raised in 2022: MOM study Singapore To Vers or not to Vers: How will this scheme affect HDB prices? Asia Malaysian MP Rafizi says his son was jabbed with syringe in planned attack, threatened with Aids Singapore askST: Will assets seized in $3b money laundering case be sold at public auctions? Singapore Woman, 68, charged over assaulting maid with scissors and nail clipper Business StarHub first-half profit falls 41.7% to $47.9m; telco eyes 'more aggressive stance' amid competition Singapore From quiet introvert to self-confident student: How this vulnerable, shy teen gets help to develop and discover her strength 'We're shifting from a world in which there were only a few primary target destination countries to a much more multipolar world,' said Mr Clay Harmon, the executive director of the Association of International Enrollment Management, which represents recruitment agencies. 'It's all adding up to this narrative that 'maybe that's not the right destination for me after all',' he said. 'And there are a whole bunch of other countries that are eager to take my money instead.' Jess Concepcion, a microbiology student from the Philippines, at Korea University campus in Seoul on Aug 2. PHOTO: NYTIMES Asia steps up For decades, in the English-speaking world, Oxford and Cambridge in Britain, the Ivy League in the United States, and other name-brand universities in Australia and Canada tended to top application checklists. Gradually, schools in China, Japan, Taiwan and Singapore started showing up in annual rankings of the top universities – with lower price tags. Governments dispatched representatives to college fairs and set goals for the number of students they wanted to bring in every year. So when Mr Trump, soon after starting his second term, began pushing international students away, Asian nations started welcoming students who couldn't continue their studies at American schools. Take South Korea, where Mr Concepcion went for his master's degree after winning a scholarship from the South Korean government that covered living expenses and tuition. He added a year of mandatory language study and enrolled at Korea University in Seoul, where his programme starts in earnest this fall. In the spring, Korea University was among several institutions to offer relief measures as the US government began cancelling some student visas and terminating funding programmes. Another South Korean school, Yonsei University, will open rolling admissions for undergraduate transfers year round starting in 2026 and is planning a customised visiting programme for students whose coursework is interrupted in the United States. Mr Trump has added urgency to such plans, but this effort has been underway in Asia for decades. South Korea has for years sent students to other countries, while attracting few from overseas. In the early 2000s, leaders started to think of that imbalance as a kind of trade deficit and set out to boost their international recruitment. They took guidance from a similar effort in Japan, which had about 337,000 foreign students in 2024 and is aiming for 400,000 by 2033. South Korea's latest target was set in 2023: 300,000 international students by 2027. For 2026, Seoul was named the top city for international students in the closely followed Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings. Early on, the South Korean government's work was intended to buoy flagging schools in smaller towns, where low birthrates and emigration to larger cities have shrunk classes of high school graduates. Foreign students are also not subject to tuition caps that apply to domestic students, creating a new revenue stream to keep universities afloat. Ms Shin Mee-kyung, the director of educational globalisation for South Korea's Ministry of Education, said that at first those foreign students were generally expected to return home after their studies. More recently, officials have started to see foreign students as an answer to the nation's labour shortage as well. Seoul established a support centre to help foreign students get jobs, and visa policies have been loosened to help them work after graduation. 'Now we are very interested in how we help them decide to stay here,' she said. For 2026, Seoul was named the top city for international students in the closely followed Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings. PHOTO: TINA HSU/NYTIMES There are about 70,000 students in South Korea from China and 50,000 from Vietnam. Myanmar and Nepal send thousands each year. For South Korean companies, the students offer an opportunity: potential hires who could help expand the business into their home countries, or manage overseas factories. Hyundai, for example, makes many of its cars in Vietnam and is trying to sell them in Singapore. Mr Kyle Guadana is a Singaporean student studying at Yonsei University, where he leads the Foreign Student Union. He said Hyundai, among other companies, had reached out directly. 'They are looking for foreigners who will be able to work with them,' Mr Gaudana, 24, said. 'They are specifically targeting South-east Asian students, because they are trying to expand their bases here.' The recruiting drive has had some complications, however. To hit its targets, the government has accepted a wider range of language proficiency tests and lowered the minimum bank balance required to obtain a visa. It has also increased the number of hours students can work in a week. Some students have used university enrollment primarily as a way to earn money in South Korea, which is not otherwise easy to do. But the larger challenge may be making sure that those who come primarily to study are able to work in South Korea when they graduate – and that they want to stay. Ms Keity Rose Mendes, 21, grew up in Mozambique and received the same scholarship granted to Mr Concepcion, studying industrial engineering at Seoul National University. She chose South Korea for its safety and because she wanted to learn about its manufacturing techniques. But after three years of classes, she felt that collaboration wasn't valued and that foreign students weren't well integrated. 'A lot of them, especially non-Asian international students, just want to finish their studies and leave,' said Ms Mendes, who is the president of the school's International Student Association. 'I wish that the same effort that they're putting into bringing international students, they also tried to put into creating facilities to maintain them here.' Ms Keity Rose Mendes, who is studying industrial engineering at Seoul National University, chose South Korea for its safety. PHOTO: TINA HSU/NYTIMES Hedging their bets For millions of students deciding where to study, the United States is still the leading destination. Degrees from top American universities command societal respect – and lucrative job offers – in countries like South Korea. But even that shine has been dulled by new obstacles since Trump took office, said Mr Pierre Huguet, the CEO of the global admissions consulting firm H&C Education. 'Many saw the US as offering more freedom and an escape from rigid social pressures in Korea,' he said. 'Now they fear visa revocations, invasive online presence reviews and a chilled campus climate, which is the opposite of what they were hoping for.' Mr Huguet said his clients were focusing on Britain and Australia. The number of South Korean students studying abroad overall has been dropping as the country's own universities climb the rankings. And the United States isn't the only developed country to push back against international students. Canada and Australia limited international student visas in 2024, while Britain raised visa fees and was contemplating shortening postgraduate work visas. 'No country is being extremely welcoming at this stage,' said Mr Yash Sharma, who runs an admissions consultancy called Longshore Education focused on the market in India. 'Everywhere in the English-speaking world there is anti-immigration sentiment going around.' NYTIMES

Trump's pay-for-play chips deal generates alarm and optimism
Trump's pay-for-play chips deal generates alarm and optimism

Business Times

time4 minutes ago

  • Business Times

Trump's pay-for-play chips deal generates alarm and optimism

[NEW YORK] US President Donald Trump's controversial plan to take a cut of revenue from chip sales to China is leading to concerns that the US government will find new ways to start charging companies for a range of business activities with other countries. Experts and sources familiar with the matter said that the surprise deal, in which Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) agreed to pay 15 per cent of their revenues from Chinese AI chip sales to the US, potentially provides a path to enter the Chinese market despite severe export controls, tariffs and other trade barriers. The question that companies must now confront is whether the risk is worth taking. Sources familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified discussing private deliberations, said that companies are struggling to figure out what the president's order means for their future, especially given the unpredictable nature of Trump's decision-making. 'This is truly bizarre and unusual, and the troubling thing, beyond the individual instances of AMD and Nvidia, is the possibility that this will be expanded,' said Gary Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 'Everything is now 'national security', according to the new definition, which means it's all subject to export licenses and then they give you a license based on your contribution.' There are concerns that US trade agencies could begin charging fees to companies every time there's a meeting to discuss tariffs, according to sources familiar with the matter who asked not to be identified discussing private deliberations. The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security, which issues export licenses, was not consulted about the revenue deal, according to sources familiar with the matter who asked not to be identified discussing private conversations. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up Trump administration officials defend the idea as a smart way to generate revenue for the US government and suggest it will extend well beyond the chips sector. 'I think we could see it in other industries over time,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Wednesday. 'I think right now this is unique, but now that we have the model and the beta tests, why not expand it?' Bessent defended the deal and rejected any national-security concerns around the decision to sell Nvidia's H20 chip to China, something that had been earlier barred for fear of giving China a boost in the artificial intelligence (AI) race. 'There are no national security concerns here,' Bessent said. 'We would not sell any of the advanced chips. So, the H20, I don't know whether you'd say they are four, five, six levels down the chips stack.' Either way, the deal highlights how Trump has pushed to open a wave of new revenue streams, including by taking ownership shares of companies or extracting higher fees to live or work in the US. The US is weighing sales of a so-called 'gold card' residency permit, it won a 'golden share' to have direct say over corporate actions by United States Steel, and it's secured investment pledges and potential revenue-sharing in country-level tariff talks. That's aside from the barrage of product tariffs that have at times left massive dislocations in globally traded markets. The matter further surprised China hawks in Congress, who have been unimpressed by the administration's reassurances. Rep John Moolenaar, the Michigan Republican who chairs the US House Select Committee on China, questioned the legal basis for the move and suggested it does an end-run around controls put in place to limit the sale of sensitive technology to US adversaries. 'Export controls are a front-line defence in protecting our national security, and we should not set a precedent that incentivises the government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance its AI capabilities,' he said. It also raises questions about where the administration will steer the revenue. Trump has mused about issuing tariff rebate checks, though he has yet to seriously pursue the idea, while at other times, he's said that it would go towards narrowing the large budget deficit. The administration had debated launching a sovereign wealth fund before shelving those plans for now. It's too soon to say whether the administration will seek to revive the fund and steer revenue there, one official familiar with deliberations said. 'Trump's aides argue that these measures will strengthen America's AI leadership by maximising its global influence and market share,' Hal Brands, a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a former Pentagon official, wrote in Bloomberg Opinion. 'Yet it is also possible that they will simply eat into America's innovation advantage.' BLOOMBERG

Trump's 50% tariff threatens India's manufacturing ambitions
Trump's 50% tariff threatens India's manufacturing ambitions

Business Times

timean hour ago

  • Business Times

Trump's 50% tariff threatens India's manufacturing ambitions

[NEW DELHI] India's largest shoemaker Farida Group had already staked out the land, a 150-acre plot in southern Tamil Nadu, for a sprawling new export plant. Then came a blow from Washington: US President Donald Trump announced he was doubling tariffs on Indian exports to 50 per cent. For Farida, which supplies brands such as Cole Haan and Clarks and depends on the US for about 60 per cent of its business, the impact was immediate. New orders stopped. The 10 billion rupee (S$146 million) project froze. 'With 25 per cent tariffs, you can still work, you can give some discount, negotiate with the buyer and make some adjustments in your profits,' Rafeeque Ahmed, the company's chairman, said. 'At 50 per cent, you don't have anything.' Farida is hardly alone. Trump's move would give India the highest tariff rate in Asia, threatening a manufacturing sector that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has spent a decade trying to build to take on the likes of China. The 'Make in India' campaign was supposed to lift manufacturing to 25 per cent of the economy. Last year, it stood at just 13 per cent – lower than the 16 per cent in 2015, according to World Bank data. The last few years did offer glimmers of the future Modi had envisioned. Apple scaled up iPhone assembly in India, making the country the second-largest smartphone producer after China. Pharmaceuticals and green tech have also gained ground. The US, whose policies and actions accelerated companies' adoption of a 'China Plus One' strategy to diversify supply chains, is now India's biggest export market and one of its top sources of foreign investment. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up That progress is suddenly vulnerable. While the tariff hike spares smartphones and pharmaceuticals for now, it puts the rest of India's US$87 billion in US-bound exports on the line. 'Forget China Plus One right now. Companies are thinking India Plus One,' Ahmed said. 'They are making plans to move out of India.' India's Ministry of Commerce and Industry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump says the tariff hike is punishment for India's purchase of discounted oil from Russia, which he argues helps fund President Vladimir Putin's war on Ukraine. But India was the only major economy to be hit with such 'secondary tariffs', even though China is the largest overall buyer of Moscow's crude. If the 50 per cent rate holds, Bloomberg Economics estimates US-bound exports from India could fall by 60 per cent and put nearly 1 per cent of gross domestic product at risk. Without exemptions for pharmaceuticals and electronics, the decline could reach 80 per cent. Even the earlier 25 per cent rate – already higher than in Vietnam, Malaysia or Bangladesh – was enough to threaten a 30 per cent drop in exports. For comparison, Chinese goods face about a 30 per cent US tariff. 'In addition to the economic challenge, politically it's difficult for Prime Minister Modi that India now pays a higher blanket rate than China,' said Alexander Slater, head of the India practice at consulting firm Capstone. China is pressing on other fronts as well. Beijing wants to limit tech transfers and equipment exports to India and South-east Asia, aiming to deter companies from relocating production, Bloomberg previously reported. China's rare earth curbs also hit Indian automakers earlier this year. At the same time, Trump's tariffs have opened the door for closer India-China ties. Direct flights may resume as soon as next month, and Beijing has eased restrictions on urea exports to India. On the factory floor, anxiety over the US tariff is palpable. Ajay Sahai, chief executive officer of the Federation of Indian Export Organisations, said that exporters could see demand fall 20 per cent in the short term. The timing could not be worse: summer 2026 orders are being placed right now, but with tariffs sitting at 50 per cent, buyers are baulking. 'I have been getting 80 to 90 calls every day concerning these issues from exporters seeking solutions and ways out,' he said. 'It's difficult to do business in such a tariff environment.' Some factories are slashing prices to hold on to customers. The only way to retain buyers is by giving huge discounts, said Sudhir Sekhri, managing director at apparel maker Trend Setters Group. Spring and summer orders account for roughly 65 per cent of his firm's revenue. In Mumbai, Sharad Kumar Saraf, managing director of Technocraft Group, which produces scaffolding, textiles and other goods, is running the numbers to reduce costs for buyers. About a third of its sales are headed for the US. 'Additional tariffs is unwarranted and uncalled for and will impact our trade severely,' he said. There's still the possibility for a reprieve. US and Indian officials are continuing trade talks, with the hopes of landing the first tranche of a bilateral trade deal this fall that could dial back tariffs. Trump will also meet Putin in Alaska this week to discuss Ukraine, any breakthrough there could strengthen the case for dropping America's oil-related levies. But time is not on India's side. The longer the uncertainty drags on, the more companies will start looking elsewhere. India's share in many of these product categories is small and US brands can shift their supply chains quickly if they decide to, said P Senthilkumar, partner at Vector Consulting Group. The tariff threat feels personal for Farida Group, whose shoe plants employ about 23,000 people, with over half producing for the US. Every paused shipment or cancelled order brings painful choices, whether to halt or slow production, or let go of staff who have spent years honing their craft. 'You can't take business decisions in such uncertainty,' said Ahmed. 'What will happen to workers? Shall I send them back? They have been with me for years, they are skilled workers, I can't just send them back.' 'Workers would be one of the biggest sufferers,' he added. BLOOMBERG

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store