There is something surprising about the Chinese and Russian positions on the recent war, particularly Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the resulting difficulties for the global economy. While the negative impact on China and Russia was greater than on other countries, they did not take any action. They rather supported Iran on several occasions, even though their trade volume with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries is many times more than with Iran.
China, Russia and the European countries left the United States and Israel to confront Iran, as if the world abandoned this vital waterway to allow the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to blackmail countries in the energy sector. Undoubtedly, this is a highly significant turning point regarding the future of the region, as well as for countries that rely more heavily on the Strait of Hormuz, such as Russia and China, and threatens their considerable interests in the region. The failure to restrain the Iranian regime by its two most important military allies, Moscow and Beijing, means that they prefer Iran over the GCC countries despite their vital interests in the latter.
The United States, led by Donald Trump, intends to contain China and prevent Russia from achieving its objectives in Ukraine, lest it gain control over Eastern Europe and weaken NATO, which has expanded into some European countries. However, on the other hand, China and Russia have major strategic interests in the Gulf countries. Abandoning these strategic interests could mean that they (Russia and China) will weaken the region. Did the US-China summit held in Beijing in mid-January result in the region being handed over to the United States, thus, abandoning the Russian and Chinese interests? This question has been raised in Arab and international political and media circles. Some observers wonder whether the new plan is a lifeline for the Iranian regime in Tehran.
The question is based on recent events. In recent years, the world suffered from the terrorist acts of Iran’s Yemeni proxy, the Houthi group, which targeted ships passing through the Bab al-Mandab Strait. During the recent war, the Houthis threatened to close this vital waterway, coinciding with Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz. This threat had an impact on the global economy, particularly on the fl ow of oil to China and Europe. East Asian countries remained silent, as if to say that their significant interests in the GCC states are not important compared to the Iranian threat. National interests are not based on mere courtesy.
Therefore, many politicians and observers are questioning the ambiguity of the stance of major powers toward countries with which they have strong ties. Despite this, these countries allow the Iranian regime to continue its terrorist aggression without attempting to stop it. Yes, the competition for interests among the United States, China and Russia is fierce. Nevertheless, it is a fundamental principle of international relations that no strategic interest or position should be relinquished without a price. We witnessed this in the recent war. Did Moscow and Beijing abandon their interests in the region? A cautious, balancing act of diplomacy is ineffective in this situation, because it grants the Tehran regime advantages that threaten the interests of these countries in the future.
The late British Prime Minister Winston Churchill established a golden rule: “There are no permanent enemies or permanent friends, only permanent interests.” This rule applies to the relations between China and Russia with the GCC states. The volume of trade and shared interests linking Russia and China with the GCC countries far exceed those linking them with Iran. Maintaining relations between Russia, China and Iran will not benefit them in any way.
