On 13 April 2026, following the US Central Command's announcement of a maritime blockade of Iranian ports, Chinese Defense Minister Dong Jun publicly stated that China is "highly concerned about the situation in the Middle East," specifically mentioning the Strait of Hormuz, stating that Chinese ships are still "navigating normally" in the relevant waters. He emphasized that this region, as a vital global energy transport route, is related to international trade and energy security, while calling on all parties to "exercise restraint and resolve differences through dialogue."
However, the key point is that the US action this time is not a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
According to measures released by the US Central Command, the US military allows ships from all countries to freely pass through international waters such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman, but will focus on intercepting two types of targets: first, all ships entering and leaving Iranian ports; and second, shipping activities involving the payment of passage fees or related economic support to Iran.
In other words, the strait itself remains open, but Iran's port system is being effectively blocked.
Against this backdrop, Dong Jun's repeated emphasis on "navigation through the Strait of Hormuz" while avoiding the core issue of "the blockade of Iranian ports" is seen by outsiders as a typical case of downplaying the issue. Apollo News commentator Wang Duren points out that the essence of this statement is to avoid a more sensitive reality: the CCP relies on Iranian energy but cannot directly counter the US blockade. This round of blockade truly chokes the CCP's energy and trade lifeline. Once Iranian exports are restricted, the CCP's access to cheap energy will be compressed, but it dares not openly challenge US actions. In other words, the CCP's current predicament is—talking about "freedom of navigation" while facing "port blockades."
More concerning is that the CCP is not entirely absent from the region. For example, it maintains an overseas military base in Djibouti and has long maintained naval deployments in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden.
However, to date, the CCP has not taken any public military action to counter or intervene in the U.S. blockade. Even its military support for Iran is something it dares not openly discuss.
The real point of interest now lies not in Dong Jun's statement, but in his actions: Will the CCP continue to "talk the talk but not walk the walk," or will it intervene at a crucial moment? What are your thoughts?
According to an announcement by US Vice President J.D. Vance on the evening of 11 April 2026, the "desperate" and "difficult and protracted" negotiations between the U.S. and Iran in Islamabad ultimately failed, and the two sides failed to reach an agreement on ending the Middle East war.
China desperately wanted the U.S. and Israel to cease their attacks on Iran
Reports indicate that these negotiations were initially abandoned, but were reached through China's efforts. Radio France Internationale quoted a senior Pakistani official as saying that China "intervened and persuaded Iran" when all hopes were almost dashed. However, Beijing's own statements have remained cautious and low-key.
According to information revealed on the website of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, China has been working hard to promote a ceasefire and push for negotiations. Iran, fearing assassination during the negotiations, only agreed to proceed after China guaranteed and promised "security."
According to Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning, China is committed to promoting peace. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has held 26 phone calls with the foreign ministers of relevant countries (including Russia, Saudi Arabia, Germany, and Iran), China's special envoy for Middle East issues has made shuttle visits to the Gulf region, and China and Pakistan have jointly proposed a five-point initiative to restore peace and stability in the Gulf and the Middle East. On April 8, at a regular press conference, Mao Ning, when asked by a reporter about the Iranian ambassador's request for security guarantees from China, did not give a direct answer, but instead vaguely stated, "We are maintaining communication with all parties and continuing to make efforts to ease the situation..."
On April 9, a Bloomberg reporter asked at a press conference: "Iran was initially unwilling to participate in the negotiations, but China helped persuade them... playing the role of guarantor and promising that Iranian officials would not be assassinated during future negotiations. What is China's comment on this?" Mao Ning gave a similar answer, implying that the CCP guaranteed Iran's security, which facilitated the negotiations. However, the CCP's efforts always backfired, and its efforts to oppose the US war consistently failed to achieve their goals.
The Middle East war is inevitably far from over, and the CCP's wishes remain unfulfilled
On the very day the ceasefire was announced, Israel launched a large-scale airstrike on Beirut, resulting in over 300 deaths and 1,165 injuries. This became the deadliest day since the war began on February 28. Iran immediately accused the US and Israel of violating the ceasefire terms and claimed that the "foundation for negotiations" had been destroyed. On April 10, a spokesperson for the Hatem Anbia Central Headquarters of the Iranian Armed Forces issued a statement saying that due to the repeated breaches of trust by the United States and Israel in the past, the Iranian Armed Forces remain on full alert and are ready to open fire at any time. The Speaker of the Iranian Islamic Parliament, Ghalibaf, also clearly stated that the Iranian people and armed forces are prepared for all eventualities.
The head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Eslami, made a strong statement to the media in Tehran: "No law or individual can stop Iran from implementing its uranium enrichment program, and the calls to restrict Iran's uranium enrichment program will ultimately be in vain." He also stated that the "enemy" now wants to reach an agreement through negotiations because previous actions, including war, have yielded no results.
Why is the CCP so eager for the US, Israel, and Iran to cease military operations? Experts say it's because the CCP is considering its own interests in the Middle East and its own economic interests, especially through this week's temporary ceasefire with Iran, which demonstrates that in the CCP's eyes, its own economic and export interests outweigh everything else. Zongyuan Zoe Liu, a senior fellow for China at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), believes that the CCP's active efforts to "facilitate" a ceasefire stem from its fear of damaging its export-oriented economy.
CCP experts themselves acknowledge that China faces immense pressure from rapidly rising energy costs and hopes the Strait of Hormuz can be reopened as soon as possible. Data shows that Iran has been supplying oil to China through the Strait of Hormuz since the outbreak of the war. Despite this, China has repeatedly raised oil prices, with gasoline prices in March rising 11% month-on-month. Rising energy costs are severely squeezing factory profit margins and exacerbating price pressures on China's manufacturing sector.
Liu states that, regardless, the fundamental structural contradiction remains unresolved: on the one hand, the CCP wants to maintain and heavily relies on the existing global order; on the other hand, the United States is determined to disrupt the existing order. This is why the CCP does not want the Middle East conflict to continue. The U.S. is also determined to intensify its attacks on Iran, leaving the CCP anxious but without any other recourse.
The CCP's low-key approach to promoting talks is also a way of concealing its true reasons for wanting a ceasefire. As time passes, the world's attention is focused on the closed negotiating room door in Islamabad, wondering what the future of the Iran war will look like.
U.S. military blocks the seas and begins fighting!
Trump's next move is straight at the CCP
The U.S. and Iran held talks in Pakistan on 11 April 2026 but the negotiations failed. On 12 April 2026, Trump posted on Truth Social, strongly accusing Iran of failing to fulfill its promise to open the Strait of Hormuz and announcing a US blockade of the waterway. On 12 April 2026, U.S. Central Command announced a maritime blockade of all ships entering and leaving Iranian ports, effective Monday morning at 10:00 am Eastern Time.
The ongoing conflict in Iran continues to draw attention. Economist Wu Jialong analyzed that Trump is now attempting to reshape the global order without a third world war, and ultimately, he will have to deal with communist China.
On 12 April 2026, economist Wu Jialong posted on Facebook about the Iran war, stating that the U.S. should not be underestimated. He mentioned that some people believe the U.S. intervention in the Iran war will be short-lived because the U.S. cannot afford to lose soldiers or its military personnel. However, he believes this is not the case. U.S. soldiers, like soldiers of other countries, pursue national interests and are willing to sacrifice themselves for them if necessary. In fact, many US soldiers have already died, but the war will continue. The U.S. does not have nationalism, but rather patriotism. Furthermore, Americans, driven by religious faith and a sense of duty to uphold justice, see themselves as the "world police" and are inclined to maintain international order. They will initially adopt a policy of diplomacy before resorting to force, and then show no mercy to those who disobey.
Wu Jialong believes that "Trump is actually trying to rebuild the global order without a third world war." He points out that the last time this happened was after World War II, which dismantled the vested interests of various totalitarian and autocratic countries, allowing for a rebuilding of new political structures. This explains the emergence of East Germany after Nazi Germany and democratic Japan after militaristic Japan—these peaceful evolutions are the work of the Americans!
Wu Jialong predicted that while the U.S. is currently dealing with Venezuela and Iran, it will ultimately have to deal with communist China. He bluntly stated, "The American sense of mission has been underestimated. Some people even like to constantly predict the downfall of the U.S., which is futile and self-indulgent. Sooner or later, they will be punished by the Americans. Trump will take over the mission and forge ahead. If you look at the Iran war from this perspective, you will know that the American spirit is the same: forging ahead until the mission is accomplished! A sense of mission is not something to be traded! Similarly, the US wants to deal with communism and communist China, so it will support Japan and Taiwan, also forging ahead without any bargaining involved."
With its large ships destroyed and small boats deployed, what's left of Iran?
Against the backdrop of escalating conflicts in the Middle East, the true state of Iran's naval power is gradually emerging. On the surface, Iran maintains two naval systems: one is the regular navy (IRIN) with approximately 18,000 personnel, primarily composed of frigates and submarines; the other is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) with over 20,000 personnel and thousands of fast attack craft. However, battlefield results have revealed the truth—this is not a "complementary strength," but rather a passive stratification after the main force was crippled.
According to multiple military assessments, since the beginning of the conflict in early 2026, the Iranian regular navy has suffered structural damage: Kilo-class submarines have essentially lost their combat capability, Fateh-class submarines have sunk, at least 11 Ghadir-class small submarines have been destroyed, and several Moudge and Alvand-class vessels have sunk. The sinking of the flagship "Dena" symbolizes the end of Iran's long-range maritime capabilities. This signifies a reality—Iran has lost the ability to confront threats head-on on the high seas.
In this situation, the Revolutionary Guard Navy becomes the only operational naval force. However, its advantage comes not from technology, but from cost and quantity: fast attack craft, drones, mines, and a decentralized command system. This system can quickly assemble dozens or even hundreds of small targets to harass shipping lanes or large ships. However, this is not an advantage, but a typical asymmetric survival strategy.
The situation in the Strait of Hormuz exemplifies this. Iran maintains its threat through mine-laying and harassment, creating uncertainty for approximately 20% of global oil shipments. But the essence of this capability is not control, but creating chaos. The cost of clearing mines is far higher than laying them, thus dragging the situation into a prolonged state of instability.
The problem is that this approach cannot bring victory; it merely drags the battlefield into chaos after Iran is suppressed, forcing others to bear the costs. It is not a proactive strategy, but a passive choice.
In other words, Iran's current maritime strategy has shifted from "confrontation" to "disruption." However, one point must be clearly understood:
Disrupting the situation is not a victory, but merely a choice made out of powerlessness; dragging others down does not guarantee your own safety.
