Beijing, a longtime friend of Tehran, turns to cautious diplomacy in Iran's war with Israel
But that's where China stopped. The usual rhetoric was delivered. De-escalation and dialogue were trumpeted. Yet China offered no material support.
Despite Beijing's clout as a near-peer rival to the United States and its ambition to play a bigger role on the world stage, Beijing refrained from offering military support to Iran, let alone getting directly involved in the conflict. The decision underscored the limitations it faces in the Middle East.
'Beijing lacks both the diplomatic capabilities and the risk appetite to quickly intervene in, and to think it can successfully navigate, this fast-moving and volatile situation," said Jude Blanchette, director of the China Research Center at RAND.
Given the tangled politics of the Middle East, where China holds substantial economic and energy stakes yet wields minimal military influence, Beijing 'isn't inclined to stick its neck out,' Blanchette added. Instead, the Chinese government opts to remain 'a measured, risk‑averse actor.'
Zhu Feng, dean of the School of International Relations at Nanjing University in eastern China, said volatility in the Middle East is not in China's interests.
'From China's point of view, the Israel-Iran conflicts challenge and impact China's business interests and economic security,' Zhu said. 'This is something China absolutely does not want to see."
After the Iranian parliament floated a plan to shut down the strategically located Strait of Hormuz over the weekend, China spoke against it. 'China calls on the international community to step up efforts to de-escalate conflicts and prevent regional turmoil from having a greater impact on global economic development,' said Guo Jiakun, a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry.
On Tuesday, following the ceasefire announcement, U.S. President Donald Trump wrote in a social media post: 'China can now continue to purchase Oil from Iran,' suggesting the ceasefire would prevent the disruption of Iranian oil production.
A 2024 report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration contained estimates suggesting that roughly 80% to 90% of the oil exported by Iran went to China. The Chinese economy could struggle to preserve its industrial production without the roughly 1.2 million barrels of oil and other fossil fuels provided by Iran.
Craig Singleton, senior China fellow at the Washington-based think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies, summed up Beijing's responses as 'steady oil buys and ritual calls for 'dialogue'.'
'That's about it," Singleton said. 'No drones or missile parts, no emergency credit line. Just words calibrated to placate Tehran without rattling Riyadh or inviting U.S. sanctions.'
Beijing's muted responses also expose the gap between China's great-power rhetoric and its real reach in the region. Said Singleton: 'China's Gulf footprint is commercial, not combat-ready. When missiles fly, its much-touted strategic partnership with Iran shrinks to statements. Beijing wants discounted Iranian oil and a 'peace-broker' headline, while letting Washington shoulder the hard-power risks.'
In statements, China sides with Iran and pledges to mediate
Since the onset of the war, Beijing — which brokered a diplomatic rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia in 2023 — stood by Iran's side and urged talks.
At the United Nations, China, a permanent member of the Security Council, teamed up with Russia and Pakistan in putting forward a draft resolution condemning 'in the strongest terms' the attacks against peaceful nuclear sites and facilities in Iran. They called for 'an immediate and unconditional ceasefire" even though the United States, another permanent member on the council, is almost certain to veto the proposal.
Shortly after Israel attacked Iran, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had a phone call with his Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, and told him that 'China explicitly condemned Israel's violation of Iran's sovereignty, security and territorial integrity.' Wang, using common diplomatic language, said China was 'ready to maintain communication with Iran and other relevant parties to continue playing a constructive role in de-escalating the situation."
Wang later spoke with foreign ministers of Oman and Egypt; both nations are key mediators in the region. And late last week, before the U.S. got involved militarily, Xi spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin; the two agreed to stay in closer contact over Iran and work toward de-escalation. But China stayed away from any direct involvement, and Russia also had muted responses to the Israel-Iran conflict.
Iran is an important link in Xi's ambitious global project Belt and Road Initiative, and in 2023 joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a security group by Russia and China to counter the U.S.-led NATO. It has conducted joint exercises with China, including this year's 'Maritime Security Belt 2025' in the Gulf of Oman, in which Russia also took part. On Wednesday, Beijing will convene a meeting of defense ministers of SCO member nations.
As important as Iran is to China, it is only part of Beijing's calculus, according to an analysis by the Soufan Center, a New York-based organization that focuses on global security challenges.
In an intel brief, the center said the conflict has revealed that Beijing's support for its partners, especially those in confrontation with the United States, 'is limited by a complex matrix of interests, including its desire to avoid alienating major economic partners and escalating tensions with the West."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Beef with Bank of America's Corporate Governance Goes Beyond His Personal Accounts: Exclusive
By Josh Kosman Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan may be a marked man in the White House and not just because his bank would not take President Trump's money, sources said. Trump on August 7 signed an executive order mandating banking regulators to investigate whether banks have discriminated against conservatives and certain industries. President Trump is targeting Brian Moynihan The President said August 5 on CNBC's Squawk Box that BofA and JPMorgan would not accept his deposits after his first term in office. But there may be more to the story. Trump sung the same tune Jan. 23 with Moynihan right next to him on a World Economic Forum stage. 'I hope you start opening your bank to conservatives, because many conservatives complain that the banks are not allowing them to do business within the bank, and that included a place called Bank of America,' the President said. 'I hope you're going to open your banks to conservatives, because what you're doing is wrong.' He was likely referring to when BofA stopped banking private prison company GEO Group, BofA insiders said. Photo by Ye Jinghan on Unsplash 'This is what Trump was pissed about,' a BofA source said. 'Trump needs GEO.' BofA in June 2019 was the last of the big banks to cut off future funding for private prison companies including GEO. 'They did not want to be the last bank standing,' a source with direct knowledge of the situation said. GEO now processes more than one-third of the people ICE detains, 20,000 beds, at 21 facilities, according to GEO. The firm also owns prisons and jails. But back in 2019 there was a big fight within the bank whether to stop doing more business with GEO after one of GEO's other big lenders JPMorgan in March 2019 said it would no longer fund private prisons. A GEO facility according to the company's website Wells Fargo was also pulling back. BofA Vice Chair Anne Finucane argued for staying the course and was very vocal about it, a source said, causing some at the bank to panic, the source said. There were meetings between top bank executives where what to do about lending to private prisons was fiercely debated. Ultimately, BofA's Global Head of ESG Andrew Plepler had the final word and BoA stopped future funding of private prisons, the BofA source said. 'The private sector is attempting to respond to public policy and government needs and demands in the absence of long standing and widely recognized reforms needed in criminal justice and immigration policies,' BofA said in a June 2019 statement to USA Today. 'Lacking further legal and policy clarity, and in recognition of the concerns of our employees and stakeholders in the communities we serve, it is our intention to exit these relationships.' Attorney General Pam Bondi used to work for lobbying firm Ballard Partners. GEO Group Chair George Zoley on June 26, 2019 commented publicly on BofA's decision to no longer extend financing to correctional and rehabilitation services providers. He said he expected there would be no impact on its $900 million revolving line of credit that did not mature until May 17, 2024. 'For over thirty years, we have provided high-quality services to the federal government under both Democrat and Republican administrations. To be clear, The GEO Group has never managed any facilities that house unaccompanied minors, nor have we ever managed border patrol holding facilities,' Zoley said at the time. GEO in 2020 sold shares of its common stock to raise money. ICE arrests a man from Guatemala, according to ICE website President Biden on January 26, 2021 issued an executive order to not renew contracts with for-profit prisons though it made an exception for immigration detention facilities. GEO Group's shares fell to below $6 a share. Under President Trump, with the ban lifted, the price roared to over $36 though it has now fallen to just over $21. Bank of America in Dec. 2023 changed its outright ban on banking private prison companies to a case-by-case assessment. CoreCivic, a GEO rival, now has a BofA deposit account, Semafor reported in June. People in today's Trump White House are likely fully aware of what transpired. Attorney General Pam Bondi was reportedly a GEO lobbyist, and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick's Cantor Fitzgerald during Biden's term helped GEO sell its shares, sources said and public filings show. Omeed Malik Former BofA Exec Omeed Malik was pushed out in 2018 for personal conduct in violation of firm standards before the GEO ban, and he too is close to the White House. Malik in 2018 filed a $100 million claim against BofA with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and reportedly settled later that year for more than $10 million. In 2022 he formed 1789 Capital to invest in anti-woke companies adding his very close friend Donald Trump Jr. as a partner. CorpGov does not know if Malik has said anything critical about BofA to The White House. Bank of America and Malik spokespeople declined comment. The White House, GEO Group, Anne Finucane and Andrew Plepler (neither of which is still at BofA) did not return calls. Read more from Josh Kosman at Contact: joshpkosman@ Never Miss our Weekly Highlights Click to follow us on LinkedIn The post Trump's Beef with Bank of America's Corporate Governance Goes Beyond His Personal Accounts: Exclusive appeared first on CorpGov. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
No crisis after all? Why Americans might be more prepared for retirement than you think.
Listen and subscribe to Decoding Retirement on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you find your favorite podcasts. Many experts are sounding the alarm that Social Security's Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) trust fund is projected to be depleted by 2033. If Congress does not act, it will only be able to pay about 77% of promised benefits, according to the latest Social Security Trustees report. Social Security becoming insolvent would create a crisis for a lot of low-income seniors who depend on that income, Andrew Biggs, author of "The Real Retirement Crisis," said in a recent episode of the Decoding Retirement podcast. However, he added that it's "very, very unlikely to happen." This embedded content is not available in your region. Biggs is not among those who believe there's a retirement crisis on the horizon or that Americans might have to plan for an across-the-board cut in their benefits. He argued that while Congress will eventually need to address Social Security, retirees and those nearing retirement are doing better financially than many people think. "We can see how many people are offered retirement plans, how many people are contributing, how much they're contributing, how much retirement savings are, how much retirement incomes are," said Biggs, who is also a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. "When you look at those things and you start pulling on the strings of this 'retirement crisis' narrative, it falls apart very, very quickly," he said. Read more: Retirement planning: A step-by-step guide Debunking the retirement crisis Biggs explained that his work in the Social Security Administration's policy office, which used highly sophisticated models to forecast future retirement incomes and replacement rates, changed his thinking about the "retirement crisis." At the time, he said, career SSA staff would read alarming headlines about a looming crisis and note, "Our models aren't showing that." In fact, they showed that future replacement rates for typical retirees would be about the same as today's. By most measures — income, wealth, poverty rates, or even self-reported financial security — current retirees are doing well, Biggs said. That doesn't mean no one faces challenges. But when it comes to household retirement savings, the data tells a far more optimistic story. In one example, a Vanguard survey asked retirees if the nation faces a retirement crisis, and about 60% said yes. Yet, when asked if their own finances amounted to a retirement crisis, only 4% agreed. Other research from the Federal Reserve finds that just about 5% of retirees say they are truly struggling. That, he said, is a solvable problem — and one we should address directly rather than fueling fear over crises that don't actually exist. Biggs also noted that most people who should be saving for retirement actually are. He cited Federal Reserve data showing that retirees without any formal retirement plan often fare better than expected. This group, which you might assume faces the greatest hardship, has an average replacement rate of about 90% of pre-retirement income, Biggs said. That's partly because lower-income workers receive a higher replacement rate from Social Security, and partly because many, such as farmers or small-business owners, draw retirement income from sources outside formal plans. In addition, Biggs noted that recent data showed that 88% of Americans approaching retirement have some form of retirement savings. "So a lot of it's just getting the numbers right," he said. "The number of times I hear statistics being used like 'nearly half of Americans approaching retirement have no retirement savings' — those numbers are simply wrong. It's really not even a matter of interpretation. They're just wrong." The perception gap about retirement So, how does Biggs reconcile his view with the Employee Benefit Research Institute's (EBRI) annual Retirement Confidence Survey, which finds year after year that only about one in four Americans feels very confident they can maintain their pre-retirement standard of living in retirement? "It is understandable that people will feel nervous about retirement," he said. "If you think about it — say, if you're 35 years old and you're starting to save for retirement — you have to think about what is the path that your future earnings will take, which you don't know. You have to think about what is the rate of return you can get on your savings. You have to think when you might retire. You have to think about how long you might live. And you get one shot to get it right." He pointed out Gallup data spanning more than two decades that asks Americans whether they believe they'll have enough money in retirement to live comfortably. Historically, about 60% of working-age adults answer yes. But when Gallup asks current retirees if they have enough money to live comfortably, that number jumps to 80%. That creates a significant gap, suggesting that many worry more about retirement than they ultimately need to. Read more from Decoding Retirement No crisis after all? Why Americans might be more prepared for retirement than you think. The caregiving crisis: An overlooked $600 billion problem in retirement planning Dr. Oz on the future of US healthcare: 'There is a new sheriff in town' Biggs admitted that it can all be quite confusing, especially given the number of pessimistic stories about retirement in the news. A common concern is that 401(k) plans fall short for several reasons. Chief among them is the notion that only about half of US workers have access to an employer-sponsored plan, leaving the other half potentially saving little or nothing for retirement. However, Biggs noted that there's a difference between coverage and participation. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data shows that about 72% of private-sector employees are offered a retirement plan at work — most often a 401(k), though some are 403(b)s or the few remaining defined benefit plans — and a little over half of them participate. Read more: How much should I contribute to my 401(k)? For someone at the age and income level where saving for retirement is critical, lacking access to an employer-sponsored plan is a real concern, Biggs acknowledged. But at the same time, some of the statistics from household surveys showing much lower coverage rates are faulty. In part, this is because of how these surveys are conducted, where "somebody shows up at your door, calls you on the phone and asks, 'Are you offered a 401(k) at work?'" "[The Social Security Administration] did a study where they looked at these surveys ... and then they matched those survey responses up to income tax data, which showed whether they were in a plan or not," Biggs said. And what they found is that many people answered these questions wrong, he noted. "When they used income tax data for these very same people, the participation rate rose from about 50% to about 60% to 62%," he said. "So a lot of this data ... we just assume the numbers are correct, and they're not." Balancing personal planning with national trends If there is a crisis, Biggs wrote in his book, it's not with people saving through 401(k)s or IRAs or pensions — it's "almost entirely on the governmental side." "Mathematically," he said, "we do either have to pay more into the system or receive less out of it. Obviously, the sooner Congress does something about it, the better off we are. But Congress has known about this long-term funding gap literally for over 40 years, and every year, including this year, they choose to kick the can down the road, and that just makes the problems more difficult to solve." Given that, what advice would Biggs give to folks who are planning for a potential increase in taxes or a reduction in benefits? "If you're a lower-income American, to be honest, I would say really don't worry about it, especially if you're somebody age 50 today who's approaching retirement," he said, noting that most Social Security reform proposals keep benefits in place for low earners or increase them. Read more: When will I get my Social Security check? Payment schedule for 2025. But if you're somebody in the middle or at the top of the income distribution, what you might want to do to prepare for Social Security's financing problems is save a little bit more in your 401(k) today, Biggs said. "Save an extra percentage point or two toward retirement every year," he said. "If we decide to fix Social Security by raising taxes, you can sort of dial back your contributions because those higher taxes will enable the system to pay higher benefits. But if, on the other hand, solvency is addressed by reducing benefits, you'll be prepared. That's something I think people can reasonably do today to protect themselves against whatever might happen in the future." Got questions about retirement? Email Robert Powell at yfpodcast@ and we'll do our best to answer it in a future episode of Decoding Retirement. Each Tuesday, retirement expert and financial educator Robert Powell gives you the tools to plan for your future on Decoding Retirement. You can find more episodes on our video hub or watch on your preferred streaming service. Sign up for the Mind Your Money newsletter Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Should You Buy the Post-Earnings Dip in Under Armour Stock?
It has been a rocky season for sportswear makers caught in the ever-shifting tariff crossfire of President Donald Trump's administration. Under Armour (UAA) is taking some heavy hits. Back in April, the Maryland based firm, famed for its high-performance athletic gear, joined 75 other companies urging Washington to spare footwear from reciprocal tariffs, warning the hit would land squarely on consumers. Under Armour sources roughly 30% of its products from Vietnam and 15% from Indonesia, both of which are now facing steep U.S. levies. That exposure could mean millions of dollars in added costs this year alone. A year into its restructuring plan, sales remain soft, margins are under pressure, and demand has yet to rebound. Supply-chain snags and potential price hikes are adding more friction to Under Armour's recovery push. More News from Barchart Why This Cannabis Penny Stock Could Be Wall Street's Next Meme Trade Breakout Apple Stock Is Gaining Momentum, Is AAPL Stock a Buy? Peter Thiel-Backed Bullish Is About to IPO. Should You Buy BLSH Stock? Stop Missing Market Moves: Get the FREE Barchart Brief – your midday dose of stock movers, trending sectors, and actionable trade ideas, delivered right to your inbox. Sign Up Now! Plus, last week's first-quarter earnings report only added to the pressure — shares sank in the high teens as management struck a cautious tone, warning that tariffs are expected to squeeze margins and slash profitability by roughly half in the current fiscal year. So, is this post-earnings selloff a golden buying opportunity, or a trap for bargain hunters? About Under Armour Stock Under Armour, founded in 1996, sprinted from a small idea to a global sportswear force, crafting gear built to make athletes better. From compression tees to loose-fit hoodies, running shoes to cleats, and gloves to backpacks, it blends innovation with style. Beyond apparel, it plays in footwear, accessories, and digital ventures, currently boasting a $2 billion market capitalization. Shares of the sports apparel maker have been getting hammered lately, hitting a low of $4.83 on Aug. 12 — just a hair above its 52-week low of $4.62 in April. Shares of Under Armour are down 23% for the past five days, leaving UAA stock 54% below its 52-week high of $10.62. Over the past 52 weeks, UAA stock has declined 37%. The RSI recently slid into oversold territory near 26, hinting at exhaustion, while volume exploded past 61 million shares on Aug. 8, a sign of heavy pressure that could either mark capitulation before a rebound or an indication that the bears still have the upper hand. Under Armour Dips After Its Q1 Earnings Report Last Friday, the athletic gear maker released its Q1 2026 earnings report — solid in some spots, shaky in others — and Wall Street sent UAA stock sliding over 18%. Revenue came in at $1.1 billion, down 4% year-over-year (YOY), but still a hair above Wall Street's expectations. North America, its biggest market, declined by 5% annually, while international revenue slipped 1%. Digging deeper, EMEA revenue rose 10%, Asia-Pacific sank 10% annually, and Latin America tumbled 15%. Meanwhile, wholesale revenue dropped 5% and direct-to-consumer sales slid 3%. Within that, owned stores sales inched up 1% but e-commerce sales cratered 12%, now just 31% of the DTC mix. By product category, apparel dipped by 1%, footwear plunged by 14%, and accessories climbed 8%. Margins weren't all bad news. Gross margin improved 70 basis points (bps) to 48.2%, helped by 'favorable foreign exchange, pricing, and product mix,' partially offset by channel mix issues and higher supply-chain costs. Meanwhile, adjusted EPS landed at $0.02, missing estimates, while adjusted operating income tripled to $24.4 million. The company's cash reserve is stronger now, with $911 million in cash and equivalents. For Under Armour's ongoing restructuring plan, announced in May 2024, restructuring and impairment charges totaled $71 million, with $39 million in other transformation costs in Q1. In total, the plan is expected to cost between $140 million and $160 million. The outlook for Q2 is where the headwinds stiffen. Management expects revenue to decline by 6% to 7%, with North America down in the low double digits, EMEA up in the high single digits, and Asia-Pacific dropping in the low teens. Tariffs are the main storm, set to cut gross margin by 340 bps to 360 bps through supply-chain disruptions and an unfavorable channel mix. However, some of that pain will be softened by foreign exchange and pricing benefits. Operating income is anticipated to be between a $10 million loss and breakeven, while adjusted operating income could land somewhere between $30 million and $40 million. Adjusted EPS is estimated to be between $0.01 and $0.02. Under Armour's road ahead is lined with headwinds, as both CEO Kevin Plank and CFO David Bergman acknowledged. Plank noted the sting of $100 million in new tariff costs and softer demand for fiscal 2026, warning profitability could drop to about half of last year's figure. Still, he framed it as just another headwind in the company's history of overcoming bigger storms, stressing that the mission — strengthening the brand, elevating prices through innovation, and winning with athletes — remains locked in. The CEO's confidence is matched by a clear playbook — premium products, sharper brand positioning, and a compelling price-to-value proposition. Bergman echoed the realism, projecting adjusted operating income to be roughly half of fiscal 2025 levels, with EPS further pressured by higher interest expenses and a steep jump in tax rate. Yet, the tone from the top stays steady, focused on brand power over short-term turbulence, determined to push the transformation forward. Analysts tracking the company anticipate fiscal 2026 EPS to fall 68% YOY to $0.10, before rising 140% annually to $0.24 in fiscal 2027. What Do Analysts Expect for Under Armour Stock? Analysts had plenty to say after Under Armour's Q1 results, and the mood was far from uniform. Evercore ISI trimmed its price target to $5 from $6, sticking with an 'Underperform' rating, and slashing forecasts. Q2 EPS expectations plunged to $0.02 from $0.24, and full-year 2026 dropped to $0.26 from $0.42. The concern is weak pricing power, not enough innovation to drive growth, tougher competition fighting for shelf space, and the looming hit from tariffs. Stifel analyst Jim Duffy played the optimist, reiterating a 'Buy' rating and $10 target. Q1 numbers came in roughly as expected, with revenue $2 million above their call and EPS just $0.01 light. Still, Q2 guidance was soft, $50 million below Stifel's revenue forecast and EPS off by $0.25 at the midpoint. The brokerage firm views EMEA as a bright spot but acknowledges North America's continued drag. Jefferies took a middle-of-the-road stance, lowering its target to $6 from $7 and maintaining a 'Hold.' Analysts noted that Q1 results were roughly in line, but the market balked at the steep Q2 guidance reset, especially the sharp drop in operating income. Analysts are cautious about UAA stock's potential. Among the 23 analysts covering the stock, the consensus rating is a 'Hold.' That's based on three analysts recommending a 'Strong Buy,' 17 staying on the sidelines with a 'Hold' rating, and the remaining three having a 'Strong Sell.' With shares sliding after earnings, UAA stock's mean price target of $5.80 hints at 19% rebound potential from where shares trade now. The Street-high target of $10 implies the stock could rally as much as 84%. On the date of publication, Sristi Suman Jayaswal did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on
