The recent wave of protests in Iran has captured global attention, prompting diverse analyses of their potential impact. This analysis, drawing on extensive discussions with Chinese security, military, and political experts in Beijing, offers a unique perspective – one rooted in China’s own strategic calculations and historical experiences, and distinct from official Chinese government statements regarding the Iran protests. It assesses the situation not as a prelude to regime change, but as a complex interplay of internal pressures and external forces.
China’s Perspective on the Iranian Unrest
Chinese analysts view the current unrest as a continuation of the instability triggered by events earlier in the year, rather than a revolutionary moment. They frame domestic turmoil and external military pressure as two sides of the same coin: sustained coercion against the Iranian state. This perspective diverges significantly from Western narratives that often portray the Iran protests as a decisive turning point.
Assessing the Scale and Scope of the Protests
Chinese security circles assessed the protests as geographically widespread, but numerically limited. While demonstrations occurred in numerous urban centers, the number of participants at any single location rarely exceeded 50,000, except during peak moments. This led to a blunt conclusion: the protesters were visible and disruptive, but lacked the demographic and organizational strength to threaten systemic collapse. In Beijing’s assessment, scale is paramount, and the current scale doesn’t indicate imminent regime failure. This contrasts with a focus on the symbolic importance often highlighted in Western media.
Domestic Security Logic and the Iranian Response
Chinese analysts echo a key argument made by Iranian authorities: the distinction between peaceful protest and violent anarchy. They maintain that no political system, regardless of its democratic credentials, will tolerate armed actors, attacks on infrastructure, or direct confrontations with law enforcement. From this viewpoint, suppressing riots is considered standard state behavior, not ideological repression. This aligns with China’s own domestic security logic, explaining its limited sympathy for calls to internationalize the Iran situation.
The Shadow of the 12-Day War
Crucially, Chinese military and policy experts don’t view the protests in isolation. They see them as a political aftershock of the previous summer’s conflict. The destruction of infrastructure, the psychological impact of strikes, and the constant threat of renewed conflict all contribute to social instability. This context is vital to understanding Beijing’s assessment.
A Looming Conflict and Regional Stability
Beijing anticipates a renewed military confrontation with Iran as increasingly likely, whether initiated by Israel or the United States. Unresolved issues surrounding Iran’s nuclear program – enriched uranium stockpiles, restricted inspections, and missile development – create strong incentives for preemptive action. However, Chinese analysts believe the military balance hasn’t significantly shifted since the previous conflict.
Assessing Military Capabilities
Both Iran and Israel retain roughly the same offensive and defensive capabilities as before. Iran remains vulnerable in air defense and air power, but possesses significant missile and drone capabilities. Israel maintains air superiority and layered defenses, but remains susceptible to saturation attacks. Consequently, Chinese experts predict another war would be more brutal and destructive, with a higher risk of regional escalation. This potential for wider conflict is a primary concern for Beijing. Regional stability is paramount.
China’s Strategic Interests and Non-Interference
This prospect alarms Beijing not due to ideological alignment with Tehran, but because of its impact on regional stability. China’s primary interest in the Middle East is predictability: secure energy flows, protected trade routes, and the avoidance of cascading conflicts. A wider war involving Iran, Israel, and the US would threaten all three.
Despite these concerns, China has no intention of intervening militarily. Beijing supports peace and stability, opposes regime change, and rejects foreign military intervention. It views sovereignty as the cornerstone of international order, and Iran as a crucial test case. This support, however, remains strictly political and diplomatic. China will not interfere in Iran’s domestic affairs or provide military backing.
Economic Considerations and Sino-Iranian Relations
The US decision to impose tariffs on countries trading with Iran is interpreted in Beijing as part of a broader economic confrontation with China, rather than Iran-specific sanctions. Chinese policymakers believe these measures are an attempt to constrain China’s global economic reach. As a result, Beijing doesn’t expect the tariffs to significantly disrupt Sino-Iranian relations. Trade may adapt, but the strategic logic will endure. This highlights the importance of Sino-Iranian relations in China’s broader geopolitical strategy.
In conclusion, China’s approach to the current crisis in Iran is pragmatic and systemic. Beijing sees protests that lack critical mass, a regime under pressure but not on the verge of collapse, and a looming war that would harm all involved. China will advocate for restraint, condemn intervention, and continue its economic engagement, while simultaneously preparing for the instability it believes others are actively creating. For Beijing, Iran isn’t about ideology; it’s about precedent. And precedents, China believes, are far more dangerous than protests.
