China and Russia reject European move to restore sanctions on Iran

UN Security Council permanent members China and Russia backed Iran on Monday in rejecting a move by European countries to reimpose UN sanctions on Tehran loosened a decade ago under a nuclear agreement, reports Reuters.

A letter signed by the Chinese, Russian and Iranian foreign ministers said a move by Britain, France and Germany to automatically restore the sanctions under a so-called "snapback mechanism" was "legally and procedurally flawed".

China and Russia were signatories to Iran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, along with the three European countries, known as the E3. President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the agreement in his first term in 2018.

The Europeans launched the "snapback mechanism" last week, accusing Iran of violating the deal, which had provided relief from international financial sanctions in return for curbs to Iran's nuclear program.

The letter published by Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi in a post on X on Monday said that the course taken by Britain, France, and Germany "abuses the authority and functions of the UN Security Council".

Iran has long since broken through the limits on uranium production set under the 2015 deal, arguing that it is justified in doing so as a consequence of Washington having pulled out of the agreement. The deal expires in October this year, and the snapback mechanism would allow sanctions that were lifted under it to take effect again.

Iran and the E3 held talks aimed at a new nuclear agreement after Israel and the US bombed Iran's nuclear installations in mid-June. But the E3 deemed that talks in Geneva last week did not yield sufficient signals of readiness for a new deal from Iran.

"Our joint letter with my colleagues, the foreign ministers of China and Russia, signed in Tianjin, reflects the firm position that the European attempt to invoke snapback is legally baseless and politically destructive", Iran's foreign minister said in his post on X.

 

 

Duality of standards for Iran and Israel

Many readers like me are unable to understand why the United States, Britain, France and Germany are adamant at imposing sanction on Iran, but are not asking Israel to stop bombarding Gaza?

The apparent contradiction reflects how strategic interests, alliances, and global optics intersect in United States and Britain, France and Germany foreign policy. Let me break it down:

Iran Nuclear Program

The United States, Britain France and Germany have long opposed Iran’s uranium enrichment, seeing it as a path to nuclear weapons. Sanctions are their primary leverage tool.

Regional Rivalries

Iran’s support for Hezbollah, Houthis, and other groups hostile to Israel and the West makes it a “destabilizer” in their eyes.

Alliance Pressures

Many Gulf Arab states are partners of Israel, US, Britain, France and Germany and they view Iran as a strategic threat, pushing Western powers to maintain maximum pressure.

Domestic Politics

In Washington and Europe, appearing “soft on Iran” is politically costly. Sanctions serve as a signal of toughness.

Israeli attacks on Gaza

Israel’s strikes in Gaza have caused massive civilian deaths. Western governments face pressure from international institutions (UN, ICC), NGOs, and their own publics.

The US, Britain France and Germany consider themselves defenders of international law. Unchecked Israeli bombing undermines their stance on Ukraine, human rights, and global order.

Escalation in Gaza risks dragging in Lebanon, Syria, and potentially Iran—threatening oil supplies and broader Middle East stability, which Europe especially fears.

In the US and Europe, large pro-Palestinian movements, especially among younger voters and immigrant communities are creating political pressure to rein in Israel.

Core Contradiction

On Iran, the West uses sanctions as a pressure tool because Iran is seen as an adversary.

On Israel, despite being an ally, the West uses diplomatic urging rather than sanctions—because Israel is a strategic partner, but its Gaza actions are politically damaging to the West’s global image.

In essence, Iran is a strategic opponent and super powers use sanctions as pressure

They consider Israel a strategic ally and want to save it from any external pressure, the statements are rhetoric only.

This double standard is being viewed in non-Western capitals (Beijing, Moscow, Global and South) as dual standard and Western stance weakens their credibility globally.

The non-Western world views this double standard of sanctions on Iran but “restraint pleas” for Israel.

China points out that the US, Britain, France and Germany are punishing Iran harshly for alleged destabilizing actions, but shield Israel diplomatically despite Gaza bombings.

By calling for ceasefires and humanitarian aid, China portrays itself as a “responsible global mediator,” contrasting with the West’s selective morality.

Iran is a vital energy partner for China under its Belt and Road Initiative. Sanctions make Tehran more dependent on Beijing, strengthening Chinese influence.

Russia

Russia terms the West’s “rules-based order” biased. They argue: “If bombing cities in Ukraine is a war crime, why not Gaza?”

Iran is often accused of supplying drones and partnering with Russia under sanctions, so Moscow benefits from Tehran’s isolation.

Russia frames itself as standing with the oppressed (Palestinians) against Western-backed aggression, resonating in Arab and African states.

Colonial Echoes

Many see the West’s defense of Israel and punishment of Iran as a continuation of imperial “divide and rule.”

Western claims about human rights and international law are viewed as selective—undermining their authority when they criticize others (African leaders, Asian governments).

Countries like Turkey, Brazil, and South Africa amplify calls for accountability against Israel, while trading more with Iran outside the dollar system.

Strategic Impact

The West’s inconsistency weakens its moral standing globally.

Non-Western powers gain diplomatic and economic space by filling the “justice gap.”

Iran, despite sanctions, finds sympathy in many Global South societies as a victim of Western double standards—while Israel risks becoming diplomatically isolated outside the Western bloc.

Moral of the story

The contradictory stances of US, Britain France and Germany may preserve short-term alliances, but they’re eroding their credibility in the long run, especially in the Global South.

 

Trump-Putin meeting and implications for East Asian allies

Nikkei Asia claims it focuses on writing about Asia from an Asian perspective. Even when writing about the current occupant of the White House, it tries to look at what his rhetoric and policies mean for this region.

Much of the world's media focused on the direct implications for Europe stemming from US President Donald Trump's summit last weekend with Vladimir Putin and his subsequent meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy and a group of European leaders.

James D.J. Brown looked at the implications for East Asia stemming from these diplomatic gatherings.

Brown writes that the US president's pandering to the Russian dictator and failure to support Ukraine bodes ill, not just for Europe, but for US allies in East Asia.

He makes three key points:

1- In rolling out the red carpet for Putin, a man subject to an arrest warrant for war crimes from the International Criminal Court, Trump is flaunting his disregard for a rules-based international order. This matters enormously to countries in East Asia, including Japan, whose security and prosperity is based on the principle that larger states cannot seize territory from weaker neighbors through military force.

2- The concern is that, having dealt with Putin over the heads of the Ukrainians, Trump could do the same with China, and make 'a big, beautiful' deal with Xi Jinping regarding Taiwan.

3- US allies in the region will be concerned about Trump's increasing unreliability and impressionability as shown by his flip-flopping on Russia policy.

Also on the American leader, William Pesek argues that Xi must be loving how Trump is remaking the US in China's image.

He writes, "Trump's Chinafication project can be seen in his effort to morph the Federal Reserve into the People's Bank of China, obscure economic data, defang the courts, take government stakes in major companies like Intel and demand a 15% cut of Nvidia's chip sales to China. The White House getting a 'golden share' stake free of charge in Nippon Steel's deal for US Steel pulsates with Politburo energy.”

"The circus atmosphere pervading Trump 2.0 means time is on China's side. Optimism that Xi will be the one making an offer Trump cannot refuse has Shanghai traders ready to pop the champagne corks. And, who knows, they may be right," Pesek adds.

Outside of the Trump-sphere, Vivian Toh explains why Huawei's HarmonyOS has struggled to adopt smaller apps, while Ben Cordier and Eve Yang make the case for Asian job markets being able to weather global economic uncertainty.

 

US issues sanctions on entities from China, Hong Kong and UAE

Reuters reports that the Trump administration on Thursday issued more Iran-related sanctions, targeting 13 entities based in Hong Kong, China, the United Arab Emirates and the Marshall Islands, as well as eight vessels, the US Treasury Department said.

The measures cover Greek national Antonios Margaritis and his network of companies and vessels that Treasury said was involved in transporting Iranian oil exports in violation of sanctions.

Treasury also designated Ares Shipping in Hong Kong, Comford Management in the Marshall Islands and Hong Kong Hangshun Shipping in Hong Kong.

Designated crude oil tankers include Panama-flagged vessels Adeline G and Kongm, and Lafit under the flag of Sao Tome and Principe.

The State Department separately said it imposed sanctions on two China-based operators of oil-related terminals and storage. It said they handled imports of Iranian oil aboard tankers previously targeted by US sanctions.

The firms were identified as Qingdao Port Haiye Dongjiakou Oil Products Co. in Shandong province and Yangshan Shengang International Petroleum Storage and Transportation Co in Zhejiang province.

Geopolitical stunts are created to maneuver oil prices

It may not be wrong to say that geopolitical stunts (or deliberate political maneuvers) are often used to influence oil prices. The time proves that oil is one of the most geopolitically sensitive commodities, and even the perception of instability can trigger price movements. Here are some ways this happens:

Military Conflicts and Threats

Tensions in oil-producing regions (Middle East, Russia, and Ukraine) raise fears of supply disruptions. Even without actual disruption, rhetoric, military drills, or strikes can cause speculative buying, lifting prices.

Sanctions and Embargoes

Sanctions on major producers (Iran, Venezuela, and Russia) reduce their exports, tightening supply. Announcements of new sanctions, even before implementation, often drive markets up.

OPEC Plus Announcements

OPEC and allies strategically announce production cuts or increases to move prices. Sometimes the timing is politically motivated — for example, cuts ahead of US elections or global summits.

Diplomatic Stunts

Leaders may signal alliances, threats, or peace talks to calm or unsettle oil markets. For instance, US–Saudi or US–Iran engagements often coincide with volatility in oil futures.

Domestic Politics

Countries that depend heavily on oil revenues (Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Nigeria, and Venezuela) may trigger or amplify tensions abroad to keep oil prices high. Conversely, big consumers (United States, China, and European Union) may release strategic oil reserves to cool prices.

Media Amplification

Headlines about “possible war,” “pipeline sabotage,” or “shipping lane blockades” often move markets more than the actual underlying event. Traders react to expectations and fear, not just physical supply-demand.

Therefore, it could be concluded that oil markets are not purely economic — they are political battlegrounds, and states often use geopolitical stunts as levers to maneuver prices in their favor.

Here are three recent real world examples (2025) where geopolitical maneuvers clearly influenced oil prices—either via threat driven surges or optimism amid shifting sanctions and diplomacy.

Threat to Close the Strait of Hormuz

In June 2025, escalating attacks between Israel and Iran triggered a spike in oil prices—Brent crude climbed to US$70 per barrel amid concerns over supply disruptions and potential threats to the vital Strait of Hormuz.

On June 14, 2025, Iran explicitly threatened to close the Strait, which handles nearly 20% of global oil traffic. Analysts warned this could push prices even higher—possibly into the US$100 to US$150 per barrel range.

While a full closure didn’t materialize, the mere threat created a sharp short-term price shock, echoing how geopolitical risk can rapidly alter market sentiment.

Russia Ukraine Peace Talks

In August 2025, oil markets closely tracked developments—or lack thereof—in high-profile diplomatic efforts involving Russia, the United States, and Ukraine.

When President Trump proposed a trilateral summit (Putin–Zelenskiy–himself), Brent crude briefly climbed—markets anticipated that a ceasefire could eventually ease sanctions and boost supply.

Conversely, when the Trump–Putin summit yielded no binding oil or policy changes, markets cooled; analysts noted the event lacked the "magic lever" to relieve supply constraints.

Ongoing sanctions and inventory draws in the US—especially amid strong demand—continued to support prices amid supply uncertainty.

OPEC Plus Production Moves

In June 2025, OPEC Plus surprised markets by announcing a modest output increase of around 411,000 barrels per day, despite prevailing worries of oversupply. This unexpected move served as a geopolitical reminder of OPEC Plus ability to tweak supply—and kept oil prices elevated.

This came at a time when global crude production was running high, yet the announcement shaped expectations that geopolitical coordination could still swing the market.

Geopolitical Stunts Still Matter

Perception matters:

Markets often react more sharply to the fear of disruption—like threats to chokepoints—than to actual events.

Short-term risk channel:

As historical analyses show, geopolitical shocks typically drive short-term price spikes via risk premiums, though long-term economic slowdown may offset these gains.

Strategic signaling:

Diplomatic posturing—summits, threats, tariffs—can sway trader sentiment and pricing, even without concrete policy shifts.

Can there be an end to India-China animosity?

Relations between China and India are on a “positive trend” towards cooperation, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told his Indian counterpart in New Delhi.

The world’s two most populous nations are intense rivals competing for influence across South Asia, and fought a deadly border clash in 2020.

India is also part of the Quad security alliance with the United States, Australia and Japan, which is seen as a counter to China.

Caught in global trade and geopolitical turbulence triggered by US President Donald Trump’s tariff war, the countries have moved to mend ties.

During talks on Monday with Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, India’s foreign minister, Wang said the two countries should “view each other as partners and opportunities, rather than adversaries or threats”.

He pointed to the resumption of “dialogue at all levels” and “maintenance of peace and tranquility in border areas” as evidence that bilateral ties were on a “positive trend of returning to the main path of cooperation”.

Wang is also expected to meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his three-day visit.

According to Indian media, Modi might visit China this month, which would be his first trip since 2018.

Relations have improved since October, when Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping met for the first time in five years in Russia.

Chinese and Indian officials have said in recent weeks that the two countries were discussing the resumption of border trade, which has been halted since 2020.

Its resumption would be symbolically significant, and follows discussions to resume direct flights and issue tourist visas.

At this juncture it is necessary to examine the factors responsible for the confrontation between China and India.

Point blank it could be said that the omnipresent confrontation is rooted in a mix of historical, geopolitical, economic, and strategic factors.

While both the countries are major Asian powers and share a long border, their relations have been tense for decades. The reasons include:

Border Disputes

The 3,488 kilometers (2,167 miles) boundary between China and India is not formally demarcated. Two main disputed Areas are: 1) Aksai Chin (controlled by China, claimed by India) and 2) Arunachal Pradesh (controlled by India, claimed by China as “South Tibet”). Repeated standoffs (Doklam 2017, Galwan 2020) occur due to patrol overlaps and differing perceptions of the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

Historical Legacy

The 1962 Sino-Indian War left a deep scar. China defeated India and occupied Aksai Chin. India still feels betrayed, as relations before 1962 were publicly friendly under “Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai” (India-China brotherhood).

Strategic Rivalry in Asia

Both nations see themselves as dominant Asian powers. China views India’s rise and its closeness with the US, Japan, and Australia (Quad alliance) as a counterbalance to Beijing.

Similarly, India sees China’s moves in the Indian Ocean (ports in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Myanmar) as strategic encirclement, often called the “String of Pearls.”

China–Pakistan Nexus

China is Pakistan’s closest ally, providing military, economic, and diplomatic support. The China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) passes through Gilgit-Baltistan, a territory claimed by India. This deepens India’s suspicion that China aims to strategically contain it.

Tibet and the Dalai Lama

India hosts the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government-in-exile in Dharamshala. China sees this as interference in its internal affairs and a threat to its sovereignty over Tibet.

Economic Competition

India sees Chinese dominance in trade and technology as a threat. After the 2020 border clashes, India banned over 200 Chinese apps and tightened FDI rules from China.

Both China and India compete for influence in South Asia, Africa, and global institutions.

Military Build-up

Both nations are rapidly modernizing and militarizing their borders. China has built extensive infrastructure (roads, rail, and airstrips) along the LAC. India is catching up with new highways, forward bases, and troop deployments.

Nationalism and Domestic Politics

In both countries, leaders use nationalist rhetoric to project strength. In India, strong responses to China are politically popular. In China, the Communist Party portrays territorial claims as non-negotiable to maintain legitimacy.

Geopolitics

China is wary of India’s growing ties with the US (Indo-Pacific strategy, defense pacts). India distrusts China’s closeness with Russia and Pakistan. Both are competing in international organizations (UN, BRICS, SCO, and G20).

Zhenhua Oil doubles crude offtake from UAE

According to Reuters, Zhenhua Oil of China, is set to double its oil offtake from Abu Dhabi National Oil Co to 200,000 barrels per day after taking on a new role leading development of one of the exporter's top oilfields.

In January, the smallest of China's state oil companies replaced French major TotalEnergies, following a bidding process to become asset leader for Bu Hasa, the largest onshore oilfield in the United Arab Emirates.

With that new role, in which Zhenhua is responsible for setting Bu Hasa's development plan and meeting production and cost targets, it also agreed a new annual deal to receive an additional 5 million tons, or 100,000 bpd, from ADNOC, the sources said.

The offtake deal, finalized around April, and Zhenhua's role in Bu Hasa have not been previously reported. It adds to Zhenhua's existing 100,000 bpd offtake agreement as an equity holder in ADNOC Onshore.

The total quantum of crude Zhenhua is contracted to receive from ADNOC will be ramped up to 200,000 bpd by around year-end.

In April, ADNOC set up an office in Beijing to expand investment opportunities with Chinese partners.

Established in 2003 under state defense conglomerate Norinco, Zhenhua specializes in oil and gas production outside China and has oil assets in Iraq, Pakistan and Kazakhstan.

In 2018, Zhenhua won a 4% stake in ADNOC's giant onshore concessions, securing a position alongside heavyweights including BP, TotalEnergies and CNPC.

With the increased offtake, Zhenhua is set to become a more active trader of Abu Dhabi's main Murban grade. The company, which runs trading desks in Beijing and Singapore, will place its first crude trader in Abu Dhabi this month, the sources added.

 

 

Trump Administration threatens backers of IMO net zero proposals

A joint statement by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, and Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy, said the Trump Administration “unequivocally rejects” the net zero framework proposal that the IMO is aiming to reach agreement on in October, reports Seatrade Maritime News.

The joint statement said the Trump Administration, “will not tolerate any action that increases costs for our citizens, energy providers, shipping companies and their customers, or tourists”.

However, the statement did not merely reject the IMO’s net zero proposals but also said that the US would retaliate against nations backing them at the MEPC meeting in October.

“We will fight hard to protect the American people and their economic interests. Our fellow IMO members should be on notice that we will look for their support against this action and not hesitate to retaliate or explore remedies for our citizens should this endeavour fail.”

There was no mention of what shape retaliation or remedies might take, but tariffs have very much been the Trump Administration’s weapon of choice.

The strongly worded rejection of the proposals follows the US delegation walking out of a vote at extraordinary meeting of the MEPC at the IMO in April. Despite the US walkout and some member states either abstaining or voting against the proposals the necessary majority was attained to take the framework forward to the next meeting in October.

The Trump Administration’s threat of retaliation against countries backing the proposals will add further difficulties to what was already expected to be a challenging meeting in October.

In May DNV Maritime CEO Knut Ørbeck-Nilssen, told a webinar, “Considering that the US withdrew from the whole process, I think it is still uncertain what will happen in October.”

While those pushing for net zero targets were critical of the proposals for not providing enough incentives for the switch green fuels such as ammonia or methanol, the Trump Administration railed against potentially higher costs for ship owners and operators using LNG and biofuels with the imposition of what it sees as a global carbon tax.

“Whatever its stated goals, the proposed framework is effectively a global carbon tax on Americans levied by an unaccountable UN organization. These fuel standards would conveniently benefit China by requiring the use of expensive fuels unavailable at global scale,” the statement said.

China is at the forefront of developing alternative fuels. According to the Methanol Institute when it comes to developing green methanol production China represents more than half of the total announced capacity to 2030 and in the near term will provide 75 to 80% up to 2028.

Rubio, Lutnick, and Duffy stated, “These standards would also preclude the use of proven technologies that fuel global shipping fleets, including lower emissions options where US industry leads such as liquified natural gas (LNG) and biofuels. Under this framework, ships will have to pay fees for failing to meet unattainable fuel standards and emissions targets.”

 

Collision between ships in South China Sea

According to South China Morning Post, two Chinese ships were involved in a collision during a confrontation with Philippine ships near the disputed Scarborough Shoal on Monday.

The incident, in which Beijing claimed it had expelled a number of vessels from the area, was the latest in a series of confrontations between the two countries in the South China Sea.

Two Philippine coastguard vessels – the BRP Teresa Magbanua and BRP Suluan – were in the area escorting the government owned fishing carrier MV Pamamalakaya and 35 local fishing vessels as part of a government initiative to support fishing communities.

The coastguard said its ships were also delivering fuel and other supplies to the fishing boats at the time.

The Philippine coastguard said its ships were confronted by the China Coast Guard (CCG)’s cutter 3104 and a PLA Navy Type 052D guided-missile destroyer, the Guilin.

It added that the two vessels collided around 10.5 nautical miles (19.5km) east of the Scarborough Shoal, a reef that has seen numerous confrontations between the two sides.

China has not released footage of the incident, but the Philippines released a video showing the accident.

The footage, apparently filmed on board the Suluan, showed the Chinese coastguard ship heading towards the Philippine vessels and firing its water cannons.

The camera then showed the destroyer at the rear of the Philippine vessel, where it was hit by the Chinese coastguard ship, which appeared to suffer extensive damage to its bow.

“The CCG 3104, which was chasing the BRP Suluan at high speed, performed a risky manoeuvre from the [Philippine] vessel’s starboard quarter, leading to the impact with the PLA Navy warship,” the Philippine coastguard said.

It also credited the crew’s “seamanship skills” for avoiding a direct hit from the water cannons.

China’s official statements have so far focused on its efforts to expel Philippine vessels from the waters around the Scarborough Shoal.

Gan Yu, a Chinese coastguard spokesman, said the Philippine ships had “disregarded repeated dissuasion and warnings from China” and “forcibly intruded” into the area.

Gan added the Chinese ships had taken “professional, standardized, legitimate and legal” methods to drive away the vessels.

It was unclear if anyone was hurt in the collision or the exact extent of the damage to either Chinese ship.

Ding Duo, an associate research fellow at the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, said that the “relatively small and fast” Philippine vessel had made a “risky” manoeuvre to cross directly in front of the destroyer.

“The Chinese coastguard vessel was pursuing from behind, could not stop in time, and did not give up the chase. The distance involved was actually normal, but the Philippine side chose a different tactic – one with a degree of recklessness and considerable danger,” he said.

The China Coast Guard and PLA Navy both carry out regular patrols in the South China Sea as part of Beijing’s efforts to assert its sovereignty.

But the accident has raised questions about how well they coordinate their operations in the disputed waters.

Other navies have suffered from similar accidents in the past, including the US Navy, which was involved in three separate collisions – two of them fatal – with commercial ships in the space of just four months in 2017.

Seven sailors died when the USS Fitzgerald collided with a Philippine cargo ship off the coast of Japan in June of that year. A further 10 died when the USS John McCain and an oil tanker crashed into each other two months later in waters east of Singapore.

 

Trump threats to India may prove hoax calls

The crude oil market's rather sanguine reaction to the US threats to India over its continued purchases of Russian oil is effectively a bet that very little will actually happen, reports Reuters.

President Donald Trump cited India's imports of Russian crude when imposing an additional 25% tariff on imports from India on August 06, which is due to take effect on August 28.

If the new tariff rate does come into place, it will take the rate for some Indian goods to as much as 50%, a level high enough to effectively end US imports from India, which totalled nearly US$87 billion in 2024.

As with everything related to Trump, it pays to be cautious given his track record of backflips and pivots.

It's also not exactly clear what Trump is ultimately seeking, although it does seem that in the short term he wants to increase his leverage with Russian President Vladimir Putin ahead of their planned meeting in Alaska this week, and he's using India to achieve this.

Whether Trump follows through on his additional tariffs on India remains uncertain, although the chances of a peace deal in Ukraine seem remote, which means the best path for India to avoid the tariffs would be to acquiesce and stop buying Russian oil.

But this is an outcome that simply isn't being reflected in current crude oil prices.

Global benchmark Brent futures have weakened since Trump's announcement of higher tariffs on India, dropping as low as US$65.81 a barrel in early Asian trade on Monday, the lowest level in two months.

This is a price that entirely discounts any threat to global supplies, and assumes that India will either continue buying Russian crude at current volumes, or be able to easily source suitable replacements without tightening the global market.

The track record of the crude oil market is somewhat remarkable in that it quickly adapts to new geopolitical realities and any price spikes tend to be short-lived.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 sent crude prices hurtling toward US$150 a barrel as European and other Western countries pulled back from buying Russian crude.

But what Trump is proposing now is somewhat different. It appears he wants to cut Russian barrels out of the market in order to put financial pressure on Moscow to cut a deal over Ukraine.

There are effectively only two major buyers for Russian crude, India and China.

China, the world's biggest crude importer, has more leverage with Trump given US and Western reliance on its refined critical and other minerals, and therefore is less able to be coerced into ending its imports of Russian oil.

India is in a less strong position, especially private refiners like Reliance Industries which will want to keep business relationships and access to Western economies.

India imported about 1.8 million barrels per day of Russian crude in the first half of the year, or about 37% of its total, according to data compiled by commodity analysts Kpler.

About 90% of its Russian imports came from Russia's European ports and was mainly Urals grade.

This is a medium sour crude and it would raise challenges for Indian refiners if they sought to replace all their Urals imports with similar grades from other suppliers.

There are some Middle Eastern grades of similar quality, such as Saudi Arabia's Arab Light and Iraq's Basrah Light, but it would likely boost prices if India were to seek more of these crudes.

If Chinese refiners were able to take the bulk of Russian crude given up by India, it may allow for a re-shuffling of flows, but that would not appear to be what Trump wants.

Trump and his advisers may believe there is enough spare crude production capacity in the United States and elsewhere to handle the loss of up to 2 million bpd of Russian supplies.

But testing that theory may well lead to higher prices, especially for certain types of medium crudes which would be in short supply.

It's simplistic to say that higher US output can supply India's refiners, as this would mean those refiners would have to be willing to accept a different mix of refined products, including producing less diesel, as US light crudes tend to make more products such as gasoline.

For now the crude oil market is assuming that the Trump/ India/ Russia situation will end as another TACO, the acronym for Trump Always Chickens Out.

But the reality is likely to be slightly messier, as some Indian refiners pull back from importing from Russia, some Chinese refiners may buy more and once again the oil market goes on a geopolitical merry-go-round.

  

Significance of Iranian President's visit to Pakistan

The world knows that Iran was the first country to recognize Pakistan’s independence in 1947 and open its embassy in Karachi, which was then the capital of Pakistan. Likewise, Pakistanis were the first to officially recognize the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979.

The people of both countries share cultural, linguistic, historical, and religious ties, and have supported each other in both bitter and sweet moments throughout history. The cultural commonalities between the two nations are such that citizens of either country do not feel estranged or alien when traveling to the neighboring country.

In Tehran, prominent places such as Mohammad Ali Jinnah Highway and Pakistan Street exist. Likewise, in major Pakistani cities, including Karachi, street signs bearing names like Iran Avenue and streets named after Iranian poets like Ferdowsi, Saadi, Hafez, Khayyam, and others can be found.

Islamabad, the capital of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, hosted Dr. Pezeshkian, President of Iran, and his accompanying delegation from August 02 to 03, 2025. This was, in fact, Pezeshkian’s first official visit to Pakistan since winning Iran’s 14th presidential election.

It is worth noting that in April 2024, the martyred Ayatollah Raisi also made a three-day visit to Pakistan, including the cities of Lahore, Karachi, and Islamabad, where he was warmly welcomed by the people and officials of that country. Following the helicopter crash and martyrdom of Ayatollah Raisi and his companions, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif of Pakistan, along with other officials, traveled to Tehran to pay their respects and attend the memorial ceremony.

In May of this year, Shehbaz Sharif once again visited Tehran to express his gratitude for Iran’s stance regarding the India-Pakistan war. Therefore, Dr. Pezeshkian’s recent visit was in response to Shehbaz Sharif’s invitation and, essentially, a reciprocation of his visit to Tehran.

Dr. Pezeshkian began his official visit in Lahore, the capital of Punjab province, by paying respects at the mausoleum of Allama Iqbal, the Pakistani philosopher and poet. It is said that over 8,000 verses of Iqbal’s poetry comprising 70% of his total works are written in Persian.

During the continuation of the visit in Islamabad, the Iranian delegation met with the Prime Minister, President, Foreign Minister, Army Chief, Speakers of the Senate and National Assembly, and Pakistani business community, seeking to implement the "Neighbor First" policy in practice. 

The current volume of annual trade between the two countries is about US$3 billion, yet many economic and commercial potentials remain untapped. During this recent visit, 12 cooperation agreements were signed in areas such as transportation, science and technology, tourism, and free trade, which, if implemented, could significantly boost bilateral relations.

One indicator of strong political relations is the frequent travel of officials between countries. In less than two years, top officials from Iran and Pakistan have visited each other’s countries four times, not including the meetings held on the sidelines of key regional and international summits. These frequent meetings highlight the close bond and significance of the relationship particularly now, when there is a growing need to expand cooperation.

Over the past few decades, Iran-Pakistan relations have enjoyed relative stability, and mutual visits and exchanges between officials have been a regular occurrence. What gives special importance to the recent presidential visit to Pakistan is the unique political situation and the developments that have taken place in recent months in South and West Asia and even globally.

The four-day war between India and Pakistan in May 2025, as two nuclear powers, created a highly sensitive situation in the region. Although brief, the consequences of this conflict continue to affect both countries and the broader region and world.

Additionally, the ongoing war and genocide in Gaza have significantly influenced global politics. In this context, the stances of Islamic countries such as Iran and Pakistan are of great importance. Tehran and Islamabad have consistently adopted shared, firm positions and have emphasized full support for the Palestinian cause. The 12-day imposed war by Israel on Iran drastically altered the geopolitics of the region and the Islamic world.

Pakistan’s positions as one of the largest and most influential Muslim nations and a nuclear power have been crucial, and the Iranian public and officials have always appreciated Pakistan’s brave and brotherly stance.

Islamabad's officials have expressed their appreciation, in various ways, for Iran’s goodwill and initiative in offering to mediate between the two countries, and for the highly important visit of Iran’s Foreign Minister Dr. Araghchi to Pakistan and India to reduce the tensions.

A key factor linking Iran and Pakistan’s foreign policies is the sensitivity of public opinion in both nations toward the Palestinian issue and their mutual opposition to Zionist occupation and crimes in Gaza. This shared stance is rooted in the principled policies laid down by the founding leaders of both nations, Imam Khomeini and Muhammad Ali Jinnah and continues today. Currently, there is deep concern over the joint illegal actions of the Zionist regime and the United States against Iran’s nuclear facilities, and the potential for similar scenarios to be repeated elsewhere.

The condemnation of the Zionist regime’s aggressive attack on Iran by Pakistan’s permanent representative at the UN Security Council, as a non-permanent member and rotating president, was well-received. Pakistan’s support for dialogue and negotiation and its affirmation of Iran’s right to nuclear knowledge were also reflected in the joint press conference held by Shehbaz Sharif and Dr. Pezeshkian.

Iranian and Pakistani officials have come to a shared understanding that the 900 plus km border between the two nations should transition from being a security border to an economic one. The two sides have created joint mechanisms to improve coordination in the fight against terrorism. There exists an ocean of untapped potential in both countries, which requires serious political will to activate. The travel of hundreds of thousands of Pakistani pilgrims as part of religious tourism is one such opportunity.

Currently, two land borders at Rimdan and Mirjaveh are operational, facilitating travel for tourists and traders. Strengthening infrastructure is essential for increasing travel between the two peoples. People-to-people ties and citizen interactions can play a critical role in raising awareness of each other’s capabilities. 

Meeting mutual needs given that the two economies complement each other should be a top priority for private sectors and businesspeople in both nations. Much of what Iran imports from other countries is easily accessible in Pakistan, and Pakistan exports goods that Iranians also import from various sources.

Pakistan can meet many of its needs through Iranian producers and benefit from the proximity and low logistics costs. There is an urgent need to upgrade the joint Iran-Pakistan Chamber of Commerce to play a more significant role.

An Iranian proverb says, “A good neighbor is better than a distant relative.” Pakistan is both a good neighbor and a good relative and we Iranians are grateful for this valued neighbor.

Courtesy: Tehran Times

 

Upcoming visit of Iranian President to Pakistan

Iran-Pakistan relationship are unique — one defined not simply by geography, but by centuries of shared civilizational experience, religious affinity, cultural kinship and converging strategic interests. The two sovereign nations can gain from an enduring partnership — and even more to contribute to the future of the region.

The upcoming state visit of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian to Pakistan reflects this growing momentum. It builds upon a history of high-level engagement that includes the late President Ebrahim Raisi’s landmark visit to Islamabad and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s reciprocal visit to Tehran.

These exchanges, along with sustained diplomatic consultation between senior officials of both the countries, represent a deepening alignment that extends well beyond ceremonial diplomacy. These reflect a conscious, strategic choice to elevate the bilateral relationship into one of regional consequence.

Iran and Pakistan share a 900-kilometre border that is more than a line dividing two states; it is a bridge that has connected peoples and civilizations for centuries. Through this frontier flowed not only trade, but ideas, languages, poetry and faiths that continue to animate our societies today.

From the celebration of Nowruz to shared Sufi traditions, the depth of cultural and spiritual interconnection has forged an enduring sense of familiarity and trust that forms the bedrock of political cooperation.

As two proud Muslim nations, Iran and Pakistan are anchored in the principles of Islam -- justice, compassion and solidarity. These values are not only sources of internal cohesion; they serve as guiding lights for international engagement. The two countries stand together in support of causes such as the Palestinian struggle, to speak out against injustice and to promote peace through cooperation and mutual respect.

Their economic complementarities offer enormous potential. Pakistan’s agricultural dynamism and Iran’s abundant energy resources, coupled with shared interest in connectivity, provide a natural basis for integration.

In addition to sectoral synergies, both nations share a long-term interest in fostering an open, equitable, and interdependent regional economy. By aligning visions, Iran and Pakistan can build a sustainable economic partnership grounded in mutual resilience, technological progress and inclusive growth. Such cooperation can play a transformative role in lifting communities, creating employment and promoting a model of development that benefits the wider region.

At a time transnational threats continue to endanger their security, Iran and Pakistan remain vigilant against terrorist networks operating in border regions. Coordination in counterterrorism is not an option; it is an imperative.

Beyond local threats, both countries face broader strategic concerns arising from aggressive postures in the region. The Israeli regime’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, its occupation of Syria and Lebanon, and its recent unprovoked attacks on Iranian territory underscore the urgency of a collective response to belligerent forces that thrive on instability and domination. Responsible states cannot afford silence. It is time to strengthen coordination, deepen security cooperation and articulate a clear and united stance in international forums.

Iran deeply appreciates the principled position taken by the Government of Pakistan in unequivocally condemning the June 2025 Israeli and American military aggression against Iranian territory. At a time Western powers chose to stand on the wrong side of history, Pakistan stood firmly for international law, regional stability and solidarity with its neighbour.

Equally moving was the heartfelt support expressed by the people of Pakistan, whose spontaneous outpourings of compassion resonated deeply across Iranian society. The Iranian people watched with gratitude as their Pakistani brothers and sisters raised their voices in their support. This display of empathy and unity will never be forgotten. It reaffirmed the profound depth of our bond and the strength of the values we share.

Iran and Pakistan also enjoy a record of close cooperation across multilateral institutions. At the UN, the two have consistently worked together to defend the rights of the Palestinian people and advance sustainable development goals.

Within the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, we advocate for addressing the pressing challenges of the Muslim Ummah. As active members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Economic Cooperation Organization, and the D-8, pursue shared objectives in connectivity, economic integration, and regional peace.

Coordinated diplomacy amplifies their voice on the global stage and helps steer international discourse towards justice, equity, and multilateralism. This collaboration is not limited to crisis management. It also reflects a broader strategic convergence.

Both Iran and Pakistan uphold principles of sovereignty, non-interference, and the peaceful resolution of disputes. Both are committed to a regional order in which Muslim nations shape their own destinies and cooperate toward collective prosperity.

Their partnership holds promise in trilateral and broader regional settings as well. With Afghanistan as their mutual neighbour, the two share an interest in stabilizing the country and ensuring that peace and development replace conflict and extremism. By integrating their economic strategies and leveraging geostrategic positions, Iran and Pakistan can help transform the region into a hub of cooperation rather than competition.

The creation of functional trade and transit corridors, grounded in mutual benefit, brings tangible dividends to our peoples and reaffirms our leadership in crafting a forward-looking regional architecture.

The path ahead calls for unity, clarity of purpose, and a willingness to transform shared aspirations into lasting institutions and practical achievements. Enhancing diplomatic dialogue, expanding economic ties, fostering educational and cultural exchanges and institutionalizing cooperation on security and development will give real depth and resilience to our relationship.

President Pezeshkian’s visit provides an opportunity not only to reaffirm commitments but to reimagine possibilities. In doing so, the two may draw inspiration from Allama Iqbal — Pakistan’s national poet and a profound admirer of Persian thought — who reminded us that the soul of nations is shaped not in fleeting political cycles, but in enduring moral and spiritual visions. His words resonate still: “Nations are born in the hearts of poets; they prosper and die in the hands of politicians.”

Iran-Pakistan friendship is not merely a relic of the past; it is a strategic investment in the future. In unity, they find strength. In cooperation, they find purpose. And in mutual respect, they find the foundation for lasting peace and shared progress.

 

China embarks on world largest hydropower dam

Chinese Premier Li Qiang announced construction had begun on the world's largest hydropower dam, on the eastern rim of the Tibetan Plateau, at an estimated cost of US$170 billion, the official Xinhua news agency said.

Commencement of the hydropower project, China's most ambitious since the Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze, was seized by Chinese markets as proof of economic stimulus, sending stock prices and bond yields higher on Monday.

Made up of five cascade hydropower stations with the capacity to produce 300 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity annually, equal to the amount of electricity consumed by Britain last year, the dam will be located in the lower reaches of the Yarlung Zangbo. A section of the river tumbles 2,000 metres (6,561 feet) in a span of 50km (31 miles), offering huge hydropower potential.

India and Bangladesh have already raised concerns about its possible impact on the millions of people downstream, while NGOs warned of the risk to one of the richest and most diverse environments on the plateau.

Beijing has said the dam will help meet power demand in Tibet and the rest of China without having a major effect on downstream water supplies or the environment. Operations are expected sometime in the 2030s.

China's CSI Construction & Engineering Index jumped as much as 4% to a seven-month high. Power Construction Corporation of China  and Arcplus Group PLC  surged by their 10% daily limit.

"From an investment perspective, mature hydropower projects offer bond-like dividends," Wang Zhuo, partner of Shanghai Zhuozhu Investment Management said, while cautioning that speculative buying into related stocks would inflate valuations.

The project will drive demand for construction and building materials such as cement and civil explosives, Huatai Securities said in a note to clients.

Shares of Beijing-listed Hunan Wuxin Tunnel Intelligent Equipment Co, which sells tunnel construction equipment, surged 30%. So did shares of Geokang Technologies Co, which makes intelligent monitoring terminals.

Cement maker Xizang Tianlu Co and Tibet GaoZheng Explosive Co, producer of civil explosive materials, both jumped their maximum 10%.

The Chinese premier described the dam as a "project of the century" and said special emphasis "must be placed on ecological conservation to prevent environmental damage," Xinhua said on Saturday.

Government bond yields rose across the board on Monday, with the most-traded 30-year treasury futures falling to five-week lows, as investors interpreted the news as part of China's economic stimulus.

The project, overseen by the newly formed state-owned China Yajiang Group, marks a major boost in public investment to help bolster economic growth as current drivers show signs of faltering.

"Assuming 10 years of construction, the investment/ GDP boost could reach 120 billion yuan (US$16.7 billion) for a single year," said Citi in a note. "The actual economic benefits could go beyond that."

The Three Gorges, which took almost two decades to complete, generated nearly a million jobs, state media reported, though it displaced at least a similar number of people.

Authorities have not indicated how many people would be displaced by the Yarlung Zangbo project.

The Yarlung Zangbo becomes the Brahmaputra River as it leaves Tibet and flows south into India and finally into Bangladesh. NGOs say the dam will irreversibly harm the Tibetan Plateau and hit millions of people downstream.

The chief minister of Arunachal Pradesh, Pema Khandu, said earlier this year that such a colossal dam barely 50km from the border could dry out 80% of the river passing through the Indian state while potentially inundating downstream areas in Arunachal and neighbouring Assam state.

 

BRICS leaders gather at Rio de Janeiro

According to Reuters, leaders of the growing BRICS group of developing nations were set to gather in Rio de Janeiro on Sunday, calling for reform of traditional Western institutions while presenting the bloc as a defender of multilateralism in an increasingly fractured world.

With forums such as the G7 and G20 groups of major economies hamstrung by divisions and the disruptive "America First" approach of US President Donald Trump, expansion of the BRICS has opened new space for diplomatic coordination.

"In the face of the resurgence of protectionism, it is up to emerging nations to defend the multilateral trade regime and reform the international financial architecture," Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva told a BRICS business forum on Saturday.

BRICS nations now represent over half the world's population and 40% of its economic output.

The BRICS group gathered leaders from Brazil, Russia, India and China at its first summit in 2009. The bloc later added South Africa and last year included Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as full members. This is the first leaders' summit to include Indonesia.

"The vacuum left by others ends up being filled almost instantly by the BRICS," said a Brazilian diplomat who asked not to be named. Although the G7 still concentrates vast power, the source added, "It doesn't have the predominance it once did."

However, there are questions about the shared goals of an increasingly heterogenous BRICS group, which has grown to include regional rivals along with major emerging economies.

Stealing some thunder from this year's summit, Chinese President Xi Jinping chose to send his prime minister in his place. Russian President Vladimir Putin is attending online due to an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court.

Still, many heads of state will gather for discussions at Rio's Museum of Modern Art on Sunday and Monday, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa.

Over 30 nations have expressed interest in participating in the BRICS, either as full members or partners.

Brazil, which also hosts the United Nations climate summit in November, has seized on both gatherings to highlight how seriously developing nations are tackling climate change, while Trump has slammed the brakes on US climate initiatives.

Both China and the UAE signaled in meetings with Brazilian Finance Minister Fernando Haddad in Rio that they plan to invest in a proposed Tropical Forests Forever Facility.

Expansion of the BRICS has added diplomatic weight to the gathering, which aspires to speak for developing nations across the Global South, strengthening calls for reforming global institutions such as the United Nations Security Council and the International Monetary Fund.

The growth of the bloc has also increased the challenges to reaching consensus on contentious geopolitical issues.

Ahead of the summit, negotiators struggled to find shared language for a joint statement about the bombardment of Gaza, the Israel-Iran conflict and a proposed reform of the Security Council.

To overcome differences among African nations regarding the continent's proposed representative to a reformed Security Council, the group agreed to endorse seats for Brazil and India while leaving open which country should represent Africa's interests, a person familiar with the talks told Reuters.

The BRICS will also continue their thinly veiled criticism of Trump's US tariff policy. At an April ministerial meeting, the bloc expressed concern about "unjustified unilateral protectionist measures, including the indiscriminate increase of reciprocal tariffs."

 

Understanding US and Russian policies towards Taliban

Russia has become the first country to recognize Taliban government in Afghanistan. It is on record that the United States and Russia have had different policies toward Taliban due to their distinct strategic interests, historical experiences, and regional alliances. Here’s a breakdown of some of the key reasons behind this divergence:

The United States has fought Taliban directly for over two decades after 9/11, viewing them as terrorist allies of al-Qaeda. This includes the US led NATO invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 to topple the Taliban regime.

Interestingly, Russia has not fought Taliban directly but has a history of conflicts in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion (1979–1989), where the US and others supported the Mujahideen, some of these are now termed Taliban).

Russia sees Taliban as part of the post-Soviet regional security dynamic, not necessarily as a direct enemy.

Most interesting is the US perspective because it considers Taliban a threats to US homeland and allies. The history shows that Afghans/ Taliban never attacked the United States. It is also said that Osama bin Laden was a Saudi, which supported Mujahideen in averting the USSR attack on Afghanistan to get access to the warm waters.

The US, which never wanted to leave Afghanistan believes that Taliban rule could once again turn the country into a safe haven for global jihadis like al-Qaeda or ISIS-K. Some analysts openly say that be it al-Qaeda or ISIS-K, these are ‘B’ teams of CIA.

The prime focus of Russia is more on Central Asian stability and drug trafficking from Afghanistan. Russia fears spillover of extremism into its southern borders but engages pragmatically with Taliban to keep its influence in the region.

Both the US and Russia are keen in engaging with Taliban. The US was initially hostile, but later engaged diplomatically, courtesy Doha talks, culminating in the 2020 US-Taliban agreement. After the 2021 withdrawal, the US maintains non-recognition and economic sanctions, demanding women rights, inclusivity, and action against terrorism.

As against, Russia has hosted Taliban delegations for talks in Moscow and calls for inclusive governance but does not condition engagement as strictly as the US. Russia did not officially recognize the Taliban either, but it was more flexible in diplomacy.

Strategic Interests

The US claims, to that many do not agree, that the super power is busy in global fight against terrorism and avoids getting entangled again in the Afghan conflict. Since withdrawal of troops the US has kept Taliban under pressure through sanctions and diplomatic isolation, including freezing foreign exchange reserves of Afghanistan.

The prime Russian interest is, ending US hegemony in the region. It also wants to protect its interests in Central Asia (Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan). On top of all Russia seems to be keen in developing regional alliances that include Taliban as a reality, not a pariah.

Over the decades, the United States has maintained its hegemony through regional alliances, working closely under the NATO umbrella. The US policy towards Taliban is part of a broader Western approach tied to liberal values and counterterrorism.

Realizing its limitations Russia works closely with China, Iran, Central Asian republics. It often coordinates with anti-Western powers and is less constrained by democratic or human rights norms.

To get control over countries two of the world’s largest super powers, the United States as well as Russia have often used arsenal power. As against this China has used diplomacy and economic assistance to establish its influence.

During the election campaign Donald Trump had promised to pull the United States out of wars, but his unconditional support to Israeli genocide in Gaza and direct attacks on Iran prove he is also the tout of military complexes and would never like to end wars where the United States is involved directly or indirectly.

 

Dalian vital engine of innovation and sustainable growth

A group of international journalists kicked off a five-day tour of northeast China’s Liaoning Province on Tuesday, with their journey beginning in the dynamic port city of Dalian—a coastal metropolis that has become a powerful symbol of China’s high-quality development, global engagement, and forward-looking innovation.

Upon arrival, the delegation visited the Dalian International Conference Center, a striking architectural landmark and recurring host of the Annual Meeting of the New Champions, also known as Summer Davos. Since 2013, Dalian has welcomed this globally significant forum five times, most recently in 2024, and is slated to host it again in next year. 

The event serves as a global platform for innovation, dialogue, and collaboration among emerging economies and forward-thinking enterprises. Dalian’s repeated selection as host reflects its growing influence in shaping global economic conversations and fostering international cooperation.

Strategically located between the Yellow Sea and the Bohai Sea, Dalian is one of China’s key sub-provincial cities, known for its strategic openness, robust infrastructure, and strong economic foundations. As a hub of advanced manufacturing, international trade, and technological innovation, the city plays a critical role in the revitalization of northeast China. But beyond its economic strength, Dalian impresses visitors with its seamless blend of modern urban design, green spaces, and coastal beauty. The delegation marveled at how the city has preserved its natural charm while building a vibrant, sustainable urban landscape that reflects China's broader goals of ecological civilization.

From its tree-lined boulevards and expansive public parks to its cutting-edge tech zones and innovation clusters, Dalian tells a compelling story of transformation—where heritage and high-tech coexist harmoniously. Its maritime economy, software and service outsourcing industries, and eco-friendly urban planning have all positioned the city as a model for smart, sustainable development in China and beyond.

The media tour is part of a broader initiative organized by the Good Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation Commission (GNFCC) of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). The GNFCC extended invitations to the journalists with the goal of deepening international understanding and showcasing the progress of Liaoning in the new era. This effort reflects the vision outlined by Chinese President Xi Jinping at the 2013 SCO Bishkek Summit, where he proposed the establishment of institutions dedicated to promoting friendship and mutual understanding among SCO member states and observers.

Following their time in Dalian, the delegation will travel to Shenyang, the provincial capital, where they are scheduled to attend two major SCO forums. These events will further highlight Liaoning’s role in regional cooperation, economic integration, and cultural exchange under the SCO framework.

As the world faces complex challenges and seeks new paths toward recovery and cooperation, cities like Dalian are proving that innovation, openness, and sustainable development can go hand-in-hand. For the visiting journalists, Dalian offers not just a window into China’s transformation, but a glimpse into a future shaped by connectivity, shared prosperity, and enduring friendship among nations.

 

SCO Defense Ministers Meet in China

Against the backdrop of intensifying global conflicts, defense ministers from the ten member states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) convened this week in China’s eastern city of Qingdao, reaffirming their commitment to dialogue, multilateralism, and regional stability.

Hosted by Chinese Defense Minister Dong Jun, the annual SCO Defense Ministers’ Meeting on June 26 emphasized strategic coordination in the face of growing international uncertainty—particularly as tensions escalate in the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

During a bilateral meeting on June 25, Chinese Defense Minister Dong met with his Iranian counterpart Aziz Nasirzadeh, who is in China to attend the SCO gathering. Dong reaffirmed China’s support for Iran’s legitimate position and criticized unilateralism and hegemonic behavior, calling them major sources of global instability.  

“In a world undergoing profound changes, unilateralism, protectionism, and power politics are eroding the international order,” Dong said. “The defense departments of SCO member states must uphold founding principles of the SCO, deepen practical cooperation, and safeguard a peaceful environment for development.”  

In response, Minister Nasirzadeh thanked China for its understanding and support in the face of the recent aggression.  

“Iran has recently come under attack, and we are grateful for China’s just position. We hope China will continue to play a constructive role in preserving the ceasefire and easing regional tensions,” he said.

In a joint statement released on June 23, the SCO expressed serious concern over the recent escalation in the Middle East, strongly condemning the United States' military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, which the organization said violated international law, the UN Charter, and the SCO Charter, particularly the principle of non-use of force in international relations.  

“The attack on Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity has seriously undermined regional and global peace and stability,” the statement read, calling for the crisis to be resolved through political and diplomatic means.  

The meeting also saw defense chiefs from India and Pakistan share the same table for the first time since a military flare-up in Kashmir last month.

Belarus and Iran, the SCO’s newest full members, participated in the event for the first time in this capacity—highlighting the organization’s growing breadth and influence.  

Dong welcomed all attendees with a call for greater defense coordination under the Global Security Initiative proposed by Chinese President Xi Jinping, which promotes common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security.  

Xiao Bin, Deputy Secretary-General of the SCO Research Center at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, described the SCO as a rare example of a multilateral security platform that emphasizes non-alignment, non-confrontation, and consensus-based cooperation.  

“It plays a unique role in stabilizing the regional landscape, curbing destabilizing factors, and promoting peaceful dialogue in times of conflict,” Xiao said.

As the rotating chair, China has overseen a year of active defense diplomacy. According to Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for China’s Ministry of National Defense, recent SCO events have helped build trust and amplify the organization’s collective voice on global security.  

“These meetings provided a vital platform for dialogue and consensus-building among all member states,” Zhang noted.  

The Qingdao meeting, held in a city symbolic for being where China first proposed the “SCO Community of Shared Destiny” in 2018, delivered a timely reminder of the group’s mission, to uphold peace, sovereignty, and shared development in an increasingly fragmented world.

As tensions mount across multiple regions, the SCO has emerged as a platform where strategic communication, mutual respect, and regional cooperation can still flourish.

 

 

China can continue to purchase Iranian oil

President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that China can continue to purchase Iranian oil after Israel and Iran agreed to a ceasefire, a move that the White House clarified did not indicate a relaxation of US sanctions, reports Reuters.

"China can now continue to purchase Oil from Iran. Hopefully, they will be purchasing plenty from the US, also," Trump said in a post on Truth Social, just days after he ordered US bombings of three Iranian nuclear sites.

Trump was drawing attention to no attempts by Iran so far to close the Strait of Hormuz to oil tankers, as a closure would have been hard for China, the world's top importer of Iranian oil, a senior White House official told Reuters.

"The president continues to call on China and all countries to import our state-of-the-art oil rather than import Iranian oil in violation of US sanctions," the official said.

After the ceasefire announcement, Trump's comments on China were another bearish signal for oil prices, which fell nearly 6%.

Any relaxation of sanctions enforcement on Iran would mark a US policy shift after Trump said in February he was re-imposing maximum pressure on Iran, aiming to drive its oil exports to zero, over its nuclear program and funding of militants across the Middle East.

Trump imposed waves of Iran-related sanctions on several of China's so-called independent "teapot" refineries and port terminal operators for purchases of Iranian oil.

"President Trump's green-light for China to keep buying Iranian oil reflects a return to lax enforcement standards," said Scott Modell, a former CIA officer, now CEO of Rapidan Energy Group.

In addition to not enforcing sanctions, Trump could suspend or waive sanctions imposed by executive order or under authorities a president is granted in laws passed by Congress.

Trump will likely not waive sanctions ahead of coming rounds of US-Iran nuclear talks, Modell said. The measures provide leverage given Tehran's demand that any deal includes lifting them permanently.

Jeremy Paner, a partner at Hughes Hubbard & Reed law firm, said if Trump chooses to suspend Iran oil-related sanctions, it would require lots of work between agencies.

 

Lifting US sanctions on Iran could crush Chinese teapot oil refineries

The possible lifting of US sanctions on Iran's oil exports could deal a fatal blow to independent Chinese refineries that have thrived by processing Tehran’s discounted crude, while also putting further downward pressure on oil prices, reports Reuters.

President Donald Trump has taken a dual-track strategy with Iran, applying a "maximum pressure" campaign of tightening economic sanctions, while simultaneously engaging in direct high-level talks over Tehran’s nuclear program. Last week, Trump indicated the sides were getting very close to a deal.

Of course, nuclear talks between Iran and Western powers have always been extremely complex – full of stops and starts – and Trump’s recent statements surrounding a potential deal include much hedging.

If there is a breakthrough deal, it would almost certainly include a repeal of many US economic restrictions on Iran’s oil industry, which would have a profound impact on global energy markets.

Strict US sanctions on Iran’s oil industry have been in place since Trump pulled out of an UN-backed nuclear deal in 2018. While sanctions have dented Tehran’s exports – the country’s major source of revenue – they have never succeeded in reducing exports to zero, as Trump vowed seven years ago.

Iranian exports reached 2.8 million barrels per day (bpd) in May 2018 and hit a low of just 150,000 bpd in May 2020, before steadily recovering to an average of around 1.65 million bpd so far in 2025, according to analytics firm Kpler.

Chinese privately owned refineries, commonly known as teapots, have been the main buyers of Iranian crude in recent years, attracted by the heavy discounts. Concentrated in the eastern Shandong province, these small independent refineries have capacity of around 4 million bpd, or roughly one-fifth of China’s total refining capacity.

Large volumes of sanctioned crude have made their way into China in recent years through a complex web of shell companies and a so-called "dark fleet" of tankers that transfer oil between different vessels to obscure the origin.

The precise total volumes involved in this trade are unclear as official Chinese customs data suggests the country does not import any Iranian oil. However, Kpler, using ship tracking and satellite technology, estimates that China imported 77% of Iran’s 1.6 million bpd of exports last year.

Iranian production could also likely be ramped up quickly.

Its oil sector has proven surprisingly resilient in the face of mounting Western sanctions, with crude oil production averaging 3.3 million bpd in 2024, according to OPEC data. Production could be ramped up by 500,000 bpd within six months of lifting sanctions.

Not only would the rapid return of Iranian crude to global markets likely put further downward pressure on oil prices that have fallen from a high of US$82 a barrel in January to around US$65 today, but it would also deal a heavy blow to China’s teapot refineries.

These independent outfits typically have very slim profit margins because most run at utilization rates of around 50% or less due to overcapacity in the sector and restrictions on exporting fuels overseas.

Plants have faced fierce competition in recent years, and those that have survived have done so largely because they have been able to generate lucrative profits by processing cheap Iranian as well as Venezuelan feedstock.

The removal of US sanctions on Iranian crude could therefore undermine their business models, meaning many plants would likely have to sharply pare back operations or, in some cases, shut down entirely.

A drop in output from Chinese teapots, in turn, could provide a boost to large state-owned Chinese refineries that will pick up the slack in the domestic market.

More broadly, a decline in global refining capacity should boost the sector at a time of increasing uncertainty over demand for fuels such as gasoline and diesel due to the ongoing trade war and energy transition.

The return of Iran into global oil markets would create headaches for many – not least Saudi Arabia, which is in the middle of a price war – but the biggest losers would likely be the independent Chinese refiners. And the biggest beneficiary, outside of Iran itself, would be the refining industry – whether or not that’s what Trump has in mind.