China issues first prohibition order to safeguard international trade order under rule of law
People’s Daily | May 3, 2026
China’s Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) on Saturday issued a prohibition order in accordance with Rules on Counteracting Unjustified Extraterritorial Application of Foreign Legislation and Other Measures (the 2021 Blocking Rules), which explicitly stated that China shall not recognize, enforce, or give effect to the unilateral sanctions imposed by the US, which listed five Chinese petrochemical enterprises on the Specially Designated Nationals List and imposed asset freezes and transaction bans on grounds of alleged oil transactions with Iran.
This move marks a crucial step for China’s foreign-related legal tools to move from institutional framework to practical enforcement. Leveraging the power of the rule of law, China has delivered a targeted response to US long-arm jurisdiction. The move defends the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises while heeding the international community’s widespread call to oppose hegemony, injecting justice into efforts to safeguard the international economic order.
China values its relations with the US and emphasizes that the essence of China-US economic and trade relations is mutual benefit and win-win outcomes. China advocates resolving concerns through dialogue on an equal-footing. However, since 2025, the US has imposed sanctions on Chinese refining, shipping and port enterprises under the pretext of “involvement in Iranian oil transactions,” freezing assets and prohibiting transactions. Under such circumstances, China’s issuance of the prohibition order in accordance with the Blocking Rules is a necessary measure to safeguard its national and corporate interests. Meanwhile, the Blocking Rules provide various institutional arrangements to steadily protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese citizens, legal persons and other organizations.
The US’ arbitrary imposition of unilateral sanctions and reckless pursuit of “long-arm jurisdiction” constituted hegemonic practices that breach sovereign boundaries and coerce the global market. By placing its domestic law above international law and wantonly interfering in the normal economic and trade activities of enterprises in other countries, such actions completely violate the basic principle of sovereign equality in international relations and have long faced resolute opposition from the international community.
As early as 1996, the European Union adopted the Council Regulation protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country, blocking the extra-territorial application of the US Helms-Burton Act and D’Amato Act, which restricted trade with Cuba, Iran, and other countries. Today, the US has escalated its abuse of secondary sanctions, wielding the sanctions stick against law-abiding Chinese enterprises. This seriously infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese business entities and disrupted the stability of the global energy supply chain. In the face of hegemonic pressure, China’s issuance of a prohibition order in accordance with the law conforms to international practice and does not affect China’s assumption and fulfillment of its international obligations.
In recent years, in response to the evolving international economic and trade landscape, China has strengthened the development of its foreign-related legal system. It has established a series of legal tools, including the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law, the Rules on Countering Foreign States’ Unlawful Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Measures, and the 2021 Blocking Rules. Laws such as the Foreign Trade Law, Export Control Law, and Foreign Investment Law have also been strengthened with provisions to safeguard the international economic and trade order, protect national sovereignty, security, and development interests, and defend the legitimate rights and interests of foreign trade operators. These legal instruments complement one another, each with its own emphasis, working together synergistically.
By issuing the prohibition order, China upholds the approach of countering hegemony with rules and defending fairness with the rule of law. It neither escalated confrontation nor made compromises, but instead negates the extraterritorial effect of the illegal US sanctions through lawful and compliant means, restoring international law to its original principle of sovereign equality. This measure not only provides relief to the affected enterprises and ensures the security of domestic industrial and supply chains, but also offers a practical example for the international community to resist unilateral bullying and oppose “long-arm jurisdiction.” It demonstrates China’s responsibility as a major country in upholding justice and defending order.
China has always advocated resolving international differences through equal dialogue, firmly upholding the multilateral trading system, and promoting inclusive economic globalization that benefits all. In the face of the countercurrent of unilateralism, China will continue to make full use of its foreign-related legal toolkit, remain resolute and be adept at defending its interests. While resolutely safeguarding its own sovereignty, security, and development interests, China will join hands with all peace-loving and rule‑of‑law-abiding countries to resist hegemonic acts and jointly promote the building of a more just, equitable, inclusive, and mutually beneficial global economic governance system.
This was compiled based on an article published in the “Chisu Jinsheng” economic commentary column of the People’s Daily on May 3, 2026. This is the translation of the Global Times English edition.
US blockade crumbles as Iran turns to overland routes
Press TV – April 30, 2026
As the US intensifies its inhuman sanctions and seeks to stifle Iran’s economy through an illegal naval blockade, Tehran has made strategic adjustments.
Pakistan formally activated a new transit corridor through Iran on Friday, announcing that the inaugural shipment including frozen meat bound for Tashkent, Uzbekistan had been dispatched via the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and Iranian overland routes.
The country designated six transit routes, including multiple key corridors connecting ports and border points inside Pakistan, forming a wide network for overland trade into Iran in a bid to bypass the maritime trade routes in the Persian Gulf.
The order, which took effect on April 25, aims to ease the logjam at Karachi Port and Port Qasim, where more than 3,000 Iran-bound containers have been stuck due to the ongoing US naval blockade of Iranian ports.
By using the new corridor, officials estimate travel time to the Iranian border will drop from 18 hours to just three hours, which in turn will lower logistics costs for regional traders.
The designated routes create a land bridge between Pakistan’s deep-sea ports and the Iranian border, offering a lifeline for third-country goods that would otherwise be vulnerable to US naval piracy at sea.
For China, the world’s largest oil importer and the destination for an estimated 90 percent of Iran’s crude exports before the current war, the opening of overland alternatives carries acute strategic significance.
With the US Navy enforcing an illegal cordon at the mouth of the Gulf of Oman since April 13, the maritime route that once carried one-fifth of global petroleum has been hijacked by an armed naval raid and subjected to systematic plunder.
The blockade’s primary target has always been as much about Beijing as Tehran. China purchases roughly 13 to 15 percent of its crude oil imports from Iran, volumes that before the war exceeded 1.38 million barrels per day.
Iranian crude, often trans-shipped through Malaysia and other intermediaries, feeds China’s independent “teapot” refineries and helps underpin Beijing’s energy security.
The Trump administration has made no secret of its intent to sever this flow. On April 23, Washington imposed sanctions on Hengli Petrochemical’s Dalian refinery, one of China’s largest independent processors, with 400,000 barrels per day capacity, alongside roughly 40 shipping companies and tankers involved in Iranian oil transport.
In a draconian announcement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned that the US would constrict “the network of vessels, intermediaries and buyers Iran relies on to move its oil to global markets”.
Yet even as the American piracy tightens, the physical blockade is showing gaps. Satellite imagery and tracking data have revealed that several Iranian-flagged vessels under sanctions had sailed out of the Persian Gulf.
While tankers maneuver, Iran’s top diplomat has been building the political architecture for overland alternatives. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi embarked on a high-stakes tour on April 23, travelling twice to Pakistan for consultations and to coordinate the corridor activation before heading to Oman and finally to Russia.
In Islamabad, the discussions reportedly focused on key issues, the details of which are not specified. But the tangible outcome was the corridor itself.
Pakistan’s new transit routes, connecting Gwadar, Karachi and Port Qasim to the border crossings of Gabd and Taftan, provide Iran with immediate access to CPEC’s road and rail infrastructure.
Gwadar was built with Chinese loans and Chinese labor precisely as a hedge against maritime chokepoints. Now, with the Sea of Oman effectively closed, goods moving overland from Iran to Gwadar can connect to Chinese markets via the CPEC network, bypassing the US Navy entirely.
On April 27, Araghchi met with President Vladimir Putin in St Petersburg for talks lasting more than 90 minutes. The Iranian foreign minister described the discussions as covering “all issues, both in bilateral relations and regional issues, as well as the issue of war and aggression by the US and Zionist regimes”.
According to media reports, the Russian president said Moscow “will do what it can to support the interests of Iran and other regional countries and help bring peace to West Asia as soon as possible”.
He added that “not only Russia, but now the whole world is admiring the Iranian people for their resistance against America”.
While Russia and Iran signed framework agreements on the International North-South Transport Corridor years ago, the current crisis has given those plans new urgency.
Araghchi used the St Petersburg meeting to reaffirm that Tehran views its relationship with Moscow as a “strategic partnership” that will continue “with greater strength and breadth”.
For China, Russia’s role is complementary. The INSTC offers a route from Mumbai to Moscow via Iranian rail links, a path that, if fully operationalized, would give Chinese goods another overland alternative to maritime shipping.
More immediately, Russia’s diplomatic cover complicates any US effort to pressure Pakistan or other neighbors into closing their borders to Iranian trade.
The central question for Washington is whether maritime piracy can achieve what missiles and airstrikes failed to deliver. After the US-Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28, it became clear that bombing alone would not bring down the country to its knees.
The blockade represents a shift to economic suffocation aiming to squeeze Iran’s oil revenues. But the strategy carries costs. Global oil prices remain elevated near $120 per barrel, stoking inflationary pressures across the US, Europe and beyond.
More fundamentally, the blockade’s success depends on land routes remaining closed. Pakistan’s activation of the transit corridor, Russia’s support, and China’s quiet integration of Gwadar into its supply chain collectively suggest that Tehran is building an overland escape hatch that the US Navy cannot interdict under any circumstance.
“Whenever there are sanctions or blockades, there will also be workarounds, whether informal channels or other flexible arrangements,” Wang Yiwei, director of Renmin University’s Institute of International Affairs, told The Straits Times. “The key question we should be asking is: can this blockade actually be sustained?”
For now, the answer appears uncertain but with each new overland corridor, Iran is proving impossible to seal and China unlikely to be starved.
US squares up to China over Panama Canal
RT | April 29, 2026
The US has announced a six-nation coalition aimed at pressuring China to relinquish its interests in two ports in the Panama Canal, accusing Beijing of infringing on Panama’s sovereignty and politicizing global trade. China has called the claims “baseless.”
The development is part of a pattern of US efforts to push China out of Latin America. The US National Security Strategy calls for non-Western “competitors” to be prevented from owning or controlling key assets in the Western Hemisphere.
Last year, US President Donald Trump claimed that China is “operating the Panama Canal” and threatened to “take it back.”
The US State Department issued a joint statement on Tuesday with Bolivia, Costa Rica, Guyana, Paraguay, and Trinidad and Tobago, saying they support Panama against what they describe as external pressure from China.
”Any attempts to undermine Panama’s sovereignty are a threat to us all,” the statement read, adding that Panama “must remain free from any undue external pressure,” and that freedom in the region is “non-negotiable.”
China rejected the accusations, with the Foreign Ministry hitting back on Wednesday against what it called a smear campaign.
”It is the United States that is politicizing and over-securitizing the port issue… hypocritically posturing and spreading rumors and smears everywhere,” spokesman Lin Jian said, dismissing the claims as “baseless and a complete distortion of facts.”
Lin urged the countries involved not to “be deceived or used by forces with ulterior motives” regarding the port inspections, which he said were conducted lawfully.
The US-led campaign follows a ruling in January by Panama’s Supreme Court that annulled contracts held by a subsidiary of Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings for the Balboa and Cristobal, two key ports at the canal’s entrances – a move that the US has backed.
The Chinese company, which managed the terminals for nearly three decades, has contested the ruling, alleging unlawful expropriation, and has launched international arbitration, seeking over $2 billion in reparations.
China discovers 225 large, medium-sized crude oil, natural gas fields from 2021 to 2025: Ministry of Natural Resources
Global Times | April 29, 2026
China’s Ministry of Natural Resources said on Wednesday that during the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-25) period, 225 large and medium-sized crude oil and natural gas fields were discovered, including 13 oil fields with reserves exceeding 100 million tons and 26 gas fields with reserves exceeding 100 billion cubic meters.
The ministry said that, during period, in collaboration with relevant departments, it made oil and gas the top priority of the new round of strategic mineral exploration breakthroughs, with a cumulative investment of nearly 450 billion yuan ($65.81 billion), and vowed to resolutely ensure that China’s energy supply remains firmly within its own control.
The remarks were made at the regular press briefing held by the ministry, which introduces the achievements of China’s new round of strategic mineral exploration breakthroughs, including the oil and gas resources.
The ministry said the newly proven geological reserves of petroleum and hydrocarbon natural gas rose by 51.7 percent and 44.2 percent, respectively, compared to the last year of the 13th Five-Year Plan (2016-20) period.
Newly proven geological reserves of deep coal-bed methane exceeded 1 trillion cubic meters, surpassing the total cumulative proven reserves of shallow coal-bed methane in history.
In 2025, there reported shale oil proven geological reserves scatter across five major basins and eight oil fields, accounting for 38 percent of the year’s new proven crude oil reserves. Unconventional oil and natural gas exploration has become a new engine driving high-growth increases, according to the ministry.
In 2025, China’s crude oil production hit a record high of 216 million tons. Natural gas output exceeded 260 billion cubic meters, rising by over 10 billion cubic meters annually for nine straight years. Shale oil output topped 8.5 million tons, and shale gas remained above 27 billion cubic meters, providing key support for increasing reserves and production.
Total oil and gas production reached 420 million tons of oil equivalent, making a vital contribution to national energy security, the ministry said.
In the deep-sea sector, the ultra-deep-water gas field, Deep Sea No. 1 was successfully brought into production, positioning China among the world’s leaders in deep-water oil and gas exploration and development. Total offshore oil and gas output surpassed 90 million tons of oil equivalent, representing a major substantive breakthrough in the strategic expansion of exploration from shallow to deep strata and from land to sea.
The significance of the oil and gas exploration breakthroughs achieved during the 14th Five-Year Plan period goes beyond mere numerical growth in reserves and production, Niu Li, an official from the ministry, said.
More importantly, “we have extended our exploration reach into deeper and more challenging frontiers, expanding the space for exploration and development, and firmly placing the initiative for energy security in our own hands,” Niu added.
Moving forward, “we will continue to advance oil and gas exploration and development, consolidate the positive trend of stable oil and increased gas,” and resolutely ensure that China’s energy supply remains firmly within its own control, Niu said.
No More Bombs for Iran, Economic War Instead?
By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | April 29, 2026
Trump assembled his national security team in Washington on Monday afternoon to figure out how to respond to Iran’s latest missive delivered via Pakistan — i.e., end the blockade and then we’ll talk about other issues. The Wall Street Journal reports that Trump opted for economic warfare against Iran as it carried less risk, instead of resuming bombing or trying to exit the conflict. That’s the good news. However, President Trump also instructed White House aides to prepare for an extended blockade on Iran.
Before I explain why that is a foolish, unworkable policy that will fail, let’s look at what Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent had to say:
“The Treasury Department, through Economic Fury, has targeted Iran’s international shadow banking infrastructure, access to crypto, shadow fleet, weapons procurement networks, funding for terrorist proxies in the region, and independent Chinese “teapot” refineries that support Iran’s oil trade. These actions have disrupted tens of billions of dollars in revenue that would be used to fund terrorism.
Under President Trump’s’ maximum pressure campaign, Tehran’s inflation has doubled and its currency has rapidly depreciated.
Kharg Island, Iran’s primary oil export terminal, is soon nearing storage capacity, which will force the regime to reduce oil production, resulting in an additional approximately $170 million per day in lost revenue, and causing permanent damage to Iran’s oil infrastructure. Treasury will continue to exert maximum pressure and any person, vessel, or entity facilitating illicit flows to Tehran risks exposure to U.S. sanctions.”
Notwithstanding the US blockade, Iran continues to fill oil tankers that are sailing out of the Persian Gulf. Iran has continued loading oil onto tankers even as the US blocks their route out. With no large volumes clearly circumventing the blockade, the loaded crude is largely filling up tankers Iran has available in the region. At least two fully laden Iranian tankers — the Hero II and Hedy — sailed out of the Persian Gulf and past the US blockade on April 20, part of a flotilla that has ferried roughly 9 million barrels of oil to market. Most tankers hauling Iranian barrels routinely sail with their automatic position signals disabled.
Since the start of the conflict, at least 52 “ghost fleet” tankers laden with Iranian oil have left the Persian Gulf, some broadcasting their signals and others operating clandestinely. These tankers are en route to Malaysia to conduct ship-to-ship transfers with other vessels bound for China.
Here is the problem the US faces in trying to impose a blockade: If the US stops an Iranian vessel and takes control of it, then the US Navy must assign one ship to accompany it to a location the US controls. The US does not have enough US Navy ships to carry out such a mission on a broad scale. All Iran needs to do is load up 20 tankers and send them to sea simultaneously. The US may be able to stop two or three, but the rest will penetrate the blockade and arrive at their respective destinations.
What about imports for Iran? According to the Fars News Agency, Pakistan has opened six corridors with Iran to bypass the US blockade. More than 3,000 containers bound for Iran are being transited over land.
Ironically, even though it is Iran that effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, the US bragging about its blockade of the Strait takes the onus off of Iran as the rest of the world begins to suffer a massive economic contraction from the Strait being closed.
Instead of suffering the wrath of nations deprived of oil and LNG from the Persian Gulf, Iran will buy itself some much needed support as it allows ships heading toward friendly nations to pass through the Strait in numbers that will make it impossible for the US Navy to stop them.
If my friend — Alex at Reporterfy — is correct, the global economy is going to face major headwinds that will be more damaging than the economic crisis of 2008. At that point the US will face major pressure to end the blockade, which is more symbolic than substantive, and renew negotiations with Iran. Iran for its part is not going to beg for relief… Iran has the full backing, including economic support, from Russia and China. Scott Bessent is deluding himself and misleading Trump by insisting that his version of economic warfare will force Iran, Russia and China to bend the knee to Washington. Ain’t going to happen. … videos
John Mearsheimer: U.S. Expands Iran War & Divorces Europe
Glenn Diesen | April 22, 2026
Prof. John Mearsheimer argues that the failure to make peace with Iran can dramatically widen the war in the Middle East, while the rift with Europe and other allies widen. John J. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, where he has taught since 1982.
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
- X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
- Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/glenndiesen
Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenndiesen
- Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng
- Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
China blames US for diplomatic impasse with Iran, urges it to show ‘sincerity’ in talks
Press TV – April 21, 2026
China has called on the United States to demonstrate “sincerity” in resolving its prolonged standoff with Iran over its nuclear program, while censuring the joint US-Israeli military aggression against the country.
In its latest Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) report, Beijing said that Washington is responsible for the current diplomatic impasse with Tehran.
The national report on the implementation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was made public online by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Monday.
According to the report, the US and Israel’s military aggression against Iran, both in June 2025 and on February 28, “seriously violated international law and the purposes of the UN Charter.”
In the report, Beijing described Washington’s unilateral withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) as the “root cause” of the current diplomatic standoff between the US and Iran.
During his first term in 2018, US President Donald Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal, branding it “the worst deal ever.” Trump claimed that he was seeking stronger terms.
The US and Israel attacked Iranian nuclear and military sites in June 2025, even as indirect negotiations were underway between Tehran and Washington regarding Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
Seven months later, the two enemies launched a new wave of aggression against the country on February 28, again as Iran and the US were on the verge of finalizing a new nuclear agreement.
Tehran asserts its legal right under the NPT to develop nuclear technology for energy production, medical research, and scientific advancement.
The US and its allies, however, accuse Iran of seeking the technical capability to produce a nuclear weapon.
Tehran has consistently maintained that it regards weapons of mass destruction as a threat to humanity and has never included them in its defense doctrine, even in the face of direct military aggression.
On April 11–12, Pakistan hosted talks between the US and Iran after brokering a two-week ceasefire on April 8, which is set to expire on April 22.
The high-level talks, however, ended without an agreement. Now reports say a US delegation is headed to Islamabad for the second round of talks with Tehran. Iran has said it has not plans to take part in new negotiations.
Iranian Parliament Speaker and lead negotiator Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said on Monday that Tehran will not accept negotiations “under the shadow of threats.”
He said, “by imposing a blockade and violating the ceasefire,” Trump intends “to turn the negotiating table into a table of surrender or to justify renewed warmongering.”
The uncertainty shrouding the next round of talks escalated after the US Navy targeted an Iranian merchant vessel in the Sea of Oman on Sunday.
Iran’s military condemned the incident as a “criminal operation” and “maritime piracy.”
In a Monday statement, Chinese Foreign Ministry voiced “concern over the forced interception of relevant vessel by the US,” warning that the situation in the Strait of Hormuz is sensitive and complex.
The Iranian-flagged cargo ship Touska had been travelling from China.
After Islamabad: How the Global South Is Reshaping Eurasian Geopolitics
By Abbas Hashemite – New Eastern Outlook – April 21, 2026
The developments surrounding the “Islamabad Talks” underscore a broader geopolitical realignment in which Pakistan, China, and other regional powers are deepening their strategic and economic integration, accelerating the rise of a Global South-led order while exposing the waning influence of the US and its traditional allies.
Behind-the-Scenes Realignment of the Global South
The Islamabad Talks 1.0, apparently ineffective, actually reshaped Global South alignment unfolding behind the scenes. In reality, the backstage transpirations during the Islamabad Talks 1.0 were more consequential than the US-Iran peace negotiations. Pakistan’s deployment of military troops and jets to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the dispatch of its first transit shipment to Uzbekistan via Iran, and Aramco’s show of intent to finalize a $10 billion investment in an oil refinery in Gwadar, in partnership with OGDCL, PSO, GHPL, and PPL, were all extraordinary developments.
Obviously, all that did not happen by chance; these developments reflect a deepening strategic alliance between Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Iran. The timing of these events suggests that all the players involved were already prepared for their integration in a rising Global South alliance but were merely constrained by the international and regional geopolitical environment. Pakistan’s deployment of troops in KSA has made it a key security provider for the country, a service that other Gulf nations might soon seek as well. However, Pakistan cannot provide security services to other nations solely without China’s collaboration, which is its major partner in intelligence, technology, reconnaissance, and strategy.
Evolving Security Architecture in the Gulf Region
The United States is one of the key security providers in the Gulf. However, during the recent Iranian attacks on the Gulf nations and Israel’s attack on Doha in September, 2025, the United States failed to defend these states. Therefore, the Arab Peninsula would soon get rid of the US fighter jets, satellite coverage, intelligence penetration, and defense mechanisms by replacing them with Pakistani and Chinese security apparatus. This would make Pakistan a key security provider in the region.
Economic Corridors and the Emerging Eurasian Connectivity
The expected finalization of the Saudi-Pakistan oil refinery deal is also a remarkable move for the success of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and Gwadar. This development will enable international shipping to refuel at Gwadar, granting Pakistani consumers a 20% price cut on oil. This oil refinery, probably connected to Saudi Arabia via an undersea pipeline, will also smash the relevance of the I2U2, giving it leverage over its regional rivals.
Moreover, the opening of the Pakistan-Iran-Uzbekistan transit route underscores the opening of the Central Asian markets to the whole world via Pakistan and Iran, a move that will strengthen Central Asian and South Asian economies and relations. Just like the CPEC, the BRI connects many corridors via Afghanistan and Iran. China’s goal is to connect all these projects internally. This is the future that the entire region is looking forward to.
Decline of Western Influence and the Rise of a Multipolar Order
It also suggests that the “Islamabad Talks” were more about signaling to Washington and its allies that the international order has altered than about US-Iran peace. Many US allies have already abandoned it in this war of choice. Italy and Spain, for instance, have denied the US the approval to use their bases in the Mediterranean. Both countries have also joined South Africa’s case in the ICC, alleging Israel of genocide. Britain, France, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Germany have refused to militarily assist the US in opening its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
Chinese diplomacy is already in full swing, with the Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez in China to strengthen bilateral economic and strategic relations. The Taiwanese opposition leader Chen Li-wun also visited Beijing, expressing the desire for a “peaceful” resolution of the bilateral dispute, stating that the Taiwan Strait will no longer be a focal point of the potential conflict and will certainly not become a “chessboard for outside forces to intervene in”.
With prospects of a second round of Islamabad Talks, which are expected to take place on Tuesday, emerging, concerns are mounting over the possible collapse of US-Iran peace efforts, which could trigger a renewed and more intense phase of conflict between the two sides. Furthermore, there are speculations that the US and Israel could use these negotiations to reorganize. However, the current circumstances suggest that the US is not in a position to initiate a ground invasion or any other military campaign against Iran, as it failed to open the Strait of Hormuz despite almost 40 days of continuous bombing on Iran. In addition, the United States stands militarily and diplomatically isolated over the issue of US-Iran, as none of its European allies have supported it militarily or diplomatically.
This war has made the United States an irrelevant and isolated international power. The whole agenda of the war has now shifted to opening the Strait of Hormuz, which was already open before the war. The US President Donald Trump is also happy that China will no longer provide weapons to Iran, which it already says it did not provide. This illustrates that the Islamabad Talks 2.0 is just to provide the United States with a face-saving way to get rid of the burden of this war, which Trump, acting as a “mad king,” started as a regime change operation, and a “God’s Plan” has ended up in expediting the decline of the US as a global superpower.
However, despite these unfavorable conditions and circumstances, there is always a possibility that the mad king might receive another directive from his Zionist master to go for a ground invasion of Iran. Although it is highly unlikely, counterintuitive, and counterproductive, as it would be a suicide mission for the United States, leading to the death of thousands of troops and causing the loss of billions of dollars, it is still expected from a person under the influence of the Zionist leader Benjamin Netanyahu.
The US President Donald Trump has already sacrificed the US hegemony to establish the Kingdom of Zionism. His ill-witted decisions have provided Russia, China, and the middle powers with an opportunity to replace the US as a global hegemon. It will also result in further strengthening the BRICS as an international alliance, replacing Western organizations and alliances. In sum, the US-Iran war has hastened the rise of a Global South-led world order and exposed fissures in the Western alliance.
Iran War fallout: Russia and China quietly take over natural gas markets in Asia, with Qatar gone
Inside China Business | April 20, 2026
The Iran War and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz have taken Qatari energy supplies completely off the market. Russian natural gas fields were shut out of Europe beginning in 2022, and energy giants there invested massively into new pipelines to Asia. China was a ready buyer for Russian oil and natural gas, and also invested heavily into huge strategic stockpiles of crude and natural gas storage. Now Russian energy production flowing East, and China is already well-supplied. Liquefied Natural Gas of Russian origin is offered at 40% discount to spot, to induce long-term supply relationships. As a result, Asian economies are shifting their supply chains from the Persian Gulf to Russia-China. Meanwhile, EU countries are unable to get LNG at all.
Resources and links:
Bloomberg, Russia Offers Sanctioned LNG to Energy-Hungry Asia at a Discount https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl…
S&P Global, Russia crude oil pipeline capabilities to mainland China—The ESPO crude oil pipeline https://www.spglobal.com/energy/en/re…
Power of Siberia 2 reshapes China’s energy security calculus https://eastasiaforum.org/2025/10/31/…
Reuters, Russia’s Gazprom supplied 38 bcm of gas to China via Power of Siberia pipeline in 2025 https://www.reuters.com/business/ener…
Russia’s Oil Windfall From Middle East War Keeps Growing https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl…
Reuters Exclusive: Iran attacks wipe out 17% of Qatar’s LNG capacity for up to five years, QatarEnergy CEO says https://www.reuters.com/business/ener…
Israel attacks three nations for alleged backing of Iran
RT | April 19, 2026
Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations has lashed out at his French, Chinese, and Pakistani counterparts, accusing their countries of effectively backing Iran by allegedly striking deals to secure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz.
The rebuke appears to stem from media reports which recently indicated that commercial vessels from all three countries were able to transit the Strait of Hormuz during the blockade, in some cases with Iranian authorization, despite broader restrictions on shipping imposed by Tehran.
“I asked the French ambassador: How much money did you pay Iran to move ships safely through the Strait of Hormuz?” Danny Danon said in a post on X shortly after speaking at the UN General Assembly session on the Strait of Hormuz blockade.
“Surprisingly, he had no answer,” he wrote, adding: “The ambassadors of China and Pakistan also had no answer.”
Navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, a key route handling around 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas flows, has been disrupted since Tehran effectively blocked the waterway in response to the US-Israeli bombing campaign that began on February 28.
On Friday, Iran opened the Strait to all commercial vessels, framing the move as part of ceasefire arrangements linked to the Israel–Lebanon truce, but closed it again the following day. The decision came as US President Donald Trump said the US blockade on Iranian ports and shipping would remain in force until a peace deal is reached. Washington imposed the restrictions after bilateral talks in Pakistan collapsed last weekend.
In March, Iran said that vessels of India, China, Russia, Iraq, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka would be allowed to pass through the crucial waterway. Beijing is ranked as the biggest buyer of Iranian oil and most of its supplies pass through the chokepoint. At the same time, Malaysian authorities thanked Tehran for allowing the passage of the country’s ships.
In April, the Financial Times reported, citing the tracking data, that a container ship owned by a French shipping company had sailed through the Strait of Hormuz along with several other ships.
At the UN, France previously voted in favor of resolutions condemning Iran’s blockade of the strait, China either vetoed the measures or voted against critical wording, while Pakistan abstained.
Persian Gulf oil production can take two years to recover from war: IEA chief
The Cradle | April 17, 2026
It could take up to two years for oil production in West Asia to return to levels from before the start of the US-Israel war on Iran in late February, Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Agency (IEA), told Bloomberg on 17 April.
“There is a general belief that the minute we see the strait open … we come back to the level of production before – which is, in my view, misleading,” Birol stated.
West Asia oil production was disrupted by the US-Israeli bombing campaign, which targeted Iranian oil and energy infrastructure.
Iran retaliated by targeting Gulf oil and gas infrastructure. It also threatened to target ships linked to the “enemy” in the Strait of Hormuz, effectively closing the waterway through which most Gulf oil is exported.
“The recovery will be gradual as damage from the conflict has affected oil fields, refineries, and pipelines across the Persian Gulf,” Birol said.
The IEA chief emphasized that the effective closure of Hormuz has caused world markets to lose hundreds of millions of barrels of crude and refined fuels.
The full resumption of liquefied natural gas (LNG) production could take even longer, with some terminals taking more than two years to repair after suffering damage in attacks, Birol added.
If a resolution to the conflict is not reached soon, energy-importing emerging economies, especially in Asia and Africa, will be hardest hit, Birol warned.
He added that early signs of demand destruction are already visible, including rationing and reduced activity, which could further reduce oil demand moving forward.
Meanwhile, US oil and gas exports have soared since the beginning of the war. Reuters reported on 15 April that the US has nearly become a net crude exporter for the first time since World War II as Asian and European buyers scramble to replace oil supplies lost due to the Iran war.
The difference between US oil imports and exports narrowed to 66,000 barrels per day (bpd) last week, the lowest on record, according to US government data. At the same time, exports reached 5.2 million bpd, the highest in seven months.
Reuters noted, however, that the US is rapidly approaching its maximum export capacity.
Iran has also increased its oil exports amid the conflict, boosting daily loadings and exports to around 2 million barrels over the past three months.
China has stepped up its purchases of Iranian crude by more than 300,000 bpd to a total of 1.6 million bpd.
Since the war began, India has resumed oil purchases from Iran, receiving at least 2 million barrels this month. New Delhi had halted its purchases of Iranian crude in 2019.
Iranian crude has recently been sold to some Chinese buyers at prices even higher than the Brent benchmark, which marks a reversal from before the war, when Iran was forced to sell oil to China at a discount due to US sanctions.
The Iran War Exposes the Emptiness of American ‘Strength’ in East Asia
By Joseph Solis-Mullen | The Libertarian Institute | April 16, 2026
For decades Washington has advertised its air and naval supremacy as the indispensable guarantor of global order. Recent events have shown this to be little but increasingly expensive theater. The 2026 Iran War has paused not with Iranian capitulation but in a cascade of humiliations that have permanently altered the strategic landscape. Washington’s vaunted power-projection capabilities proved unable to shield even its own forward bases, depleted critical munitions stockpiles, and ultimately ceded effective control of the Strait of Hormuz to Tehran. These lessons will not be lost on Beijing or Taipei. If the United States cannot impose its will on Iran, or previously the Houthis, it cannot credibly claim it could defend Taiwan against the far more formidable People’s Liberation Army.
Begin with the facts on the ground. Iranian retaliation rendered at least a dozen U.S. facilities across the Gulf effectively unusable. Satellite imagery revealed craters where hardened aircraft shelters once stood at Al-Udeid in Qatar, Prince Sultan in Saudi Arabia, and installations in the UAE, Bahrain, and Kuwait. Damage estimates reached easily into the hundreds of millions in the first two weeks alone. U.S. casualties climbed into the hundreds wounded, with over a dozen killed. Meanwhile, the Houthis, far from being neutralized by years of prior American and British airstrikes, continued to threaten Red Sea shipping and tie down U.S. naval assets. The net result was unmistakable: Washington lost operational basing, prestige, and the aura of invulnerability, all while expending interceptors at a rate its defense industrial base cannot sustain.
The munitions problem is particularly acute. Analysts estimate that roughly a quarter of America’s upper-tier interceptor inventory, THAAD, Patriot, and SM-3 interceptors, were expended in a matter of weeks. Replenishment will take years: the production capacity simply does not exist at the necessary scale. China, by contrast, fields a missile arsenal that is both larger and cheaper to sustain. The PLA can produce ballistic and cruise missiles at a fraction of the cost of U.S. interceptors and in volumes that would overwhelm American magazines within days in a Taiwan contingency. The cost-exchange ratio is brutally asymmetric: a single American SM-3 or PAC-3 arrayed against swarms of cheaper rockets and drones.
This disparity matters all the more because the geography that doomed U.S. basing in the Gulf applies with even greater force in the Western Pacific. China’s anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) architecture—particularly its DF-21D and DF-26 “carrier killer” missiles, land-based hypersonics, integrated air defense networks, and a growing submarine fleet—turns the waters within the first island chain into a kill zone for surface vessels. U.S. naval planners have long acknowledged, if only in private, that carrier strike groups cannot operate within the Strait or its immediate approaches without incurring unacceptable risk. The 2026 Middle East experience merely confirms what those worst-case assessments have long suggested: when an adversary can launch salvos measured in the hundreds from mobile, hardened, or subterranean positions, forward-deployed U.S. forces become targets rather than instruments of deterrence.
The industrial base mismatch compounds the problem. China’s shipyards, missile factories, and drone assembly lines increasingly resemble a wartime footing. The United States, by contrast, struggles to produce even basic artillery shells at scale, let alone the sophisticated guided munitions required for sustained high-intensity conflict. Pentagon wargames have repeatedly shown that in a Taiwan scenario, the United States would exhaust its long-range anti-ship and land-attack missiles within two to three weeks: The Middle East has now provided a real-world demonstration that even these projections may be optimistic.
It is therefore hardly surprising that Taiwanese political actors are adjusting their posture. In the immediate aftermath of the Hormuz debacle, elements of the island’s opposition undertook a high-profile “peace mission” to Beijing. Invoking the legacy of Sun Yat-sen and calling for renewed cross-strait dialogue, they signaled a growing recognition that unconditional reliance on American military intervention is no longer a viable long-term strategy. While Taipei’s current leadership continues to reject Beijing’s claims, the political winds are shifting.
None of this is particularly surprising. For years, even the Pentagon’s internal assessments have warned that China’s growing quantitative and qualitative advantages in the Western Pacific are eroding the foundations of traditional U.S. power projection—in November Hegseth said it openly. What the Iran War provided was not new information, but political clarity. The same voices who dismissed Houthi drones and Iranian missiles as manageable nuisances are now confronted with the reality that a peer competitor could achieve similar effects on a vastly larger scale—and at far lower cost.
The fiscal implications are no less sobering. When the full spectrum of defense-related expenditures is accounted for, U.S. military spending already approaches $1.5 trillion annually. Every interceptor expended over the Gulf represents resources diverted from capabilities that, in any case, may not survive in a Taiwan scenario. The American taxpayer is thus underwriting a deterrent that no longer deters and a forward presence that has become a forward liability.
The lesson for the high priests of Washington’s global primacy is straightforward: the United States cannot function as the world’s policeman because the world has outgrown the role. From the libertarian perspective, the lesson is likewise straightforward: Empire is not only expensive; it is fragile and ultimately self-defeating. The 2026 Middle East campaign was not an aberration but the logical culmination of decades of strategic overreach. Washington’s inability to impose its will on Iran, a nation of ninety million with an economy smaller than that of Massachusetts, reveals the limits of air and naval power against determined, decentralized resistance. To imagine that this same model could be scaled successfully against a peer nuclear power with the world’s largest navy by hull count and an economy oriented toward protracted conflict is not strategy. It is hubris.
The appropriate response is not to double down on commitments that cannot be honored. It is to recognize that the security of Taiwan, like that of the Gulf, ultimately rests with the states most directly involved. Diplomacy and economic engagement offer more realistic paths than continued reliance on a Seventh Fleet that can no longer reliably reach, or survive in, the theater of operations.
The sooner Washington internalizes the lessons of its latest strategic own goal, the less likely it is to stumble into the next, and far more costly, one.

