Why China and Russia will not enter Iran-Israel war
Listen to article
The escalating war between Israel and Iran is currently being led by two main developments that may eventually determine how this war might end. The first development is that President Trump has announced that he is giving Iran two weeks to reconsider its position before the US may take a final decision to enter the war on Israel's side. The second development is that the Iranian foreign minister is traveling to Geneva to meet the foreign ministers of European countries, as the two sides explore the possibility of finding a diplomatic solution to the problem before the US weighs its options to join the war.
Interestingly, there is also an increased debate on the subject of whether, at some stage of this ongoing conflict, the other two great powers, China and Russia, may join this war. In case they don't, it is assumed that the world will once again turn to a unipolar moment with the US acting as the de facto global hegemon. I tend to disagree with this assessment and try to justify my claim based on pure, realistic logic.
The Israeli military strikes on Iran, despite the ongoing process of negotiations between the US and Iran, once again proved the realist assumption that in the anarchic structure of the international system, states cannot be certain about each other's intentions and must continue to acquire capabilities to maintain balance of power to protect themselves. That the weak states are taken advantage of was proved in how China bore a century of humiliation from 1840 to 1940, where the Europeans and the Japanese took advantage of its weakness and vulnerability.
The same happened with Russia, which, after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, became weak and vulnerable, and NATO expanded eastwards and included its former republics as member states. This disregard for Russian security by the US and its allies only happened because Russia was weak. As President Putin reoccupied the office of Russian President in 2012, Russia started contesting NATO's eastward encroachment. Russia grew powerful, became the regional hegemon and started protecting its sphere of influence.
The realist logic is based on state survival first; and to survive, great powers must continue to acquire power, enhance their capabilities and safeguard their interests at all costs. And that's what Russia did. The US never allowed Europeans to interfere in its sphere of influence in the western hemisphere, and there should be no doubt that both China and Russia go by the same strategic and realist logic and would not want outside interference in their sphere of influence.
The US premise of viewing Russia and China as posing geopolitical threats to the world is a premise based on wrong assumptions. There was a time that the US indulged in exporting liberal hegemony in the world with disregard to the power politics and the concept of balance of power, as the other two great powers, Russia and China, were weak.
The US and its western allies were able to expand NATO eastwards only because of this slack in the international system of the time. If the US decision of NATO expansion seemed rational at that time, then from the Russian perspective, Russia's decision to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO under the changed international environment of multipolarity may also be considered rational.
Professor Mearsheimer, famous realist scholar, professes the theory that all states are rational. But he also states that theories are simplifications of realities, and realities are complicated. Theories are utilised to navigate the world; and sometimes, depending on the prevailing international conditions and environment, theories may prove wrong. If in the unipolar moment the eastward expansion of NATO was a rational decision based on the realist theory of power maximisation then the Russian decision to fight war in Ukraine in the changed international environment may also be considered as a rational decision by a state acting on the realist logic of state survival and power maximisation.
To answer the question of why China or Russia will not directly participate or join the war, even if the US intervenes in the war on behalf of Israel, is also based on realist logic. If the US intervenes in this war, it will not be able to fully pivot towards the Asia-Pacific to contain China. So, from the Chinese point of view, the involvement of the US and its allies in the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East may go on forever, as that would prevent the US from deploying its assets against China to contain it.
Russia also has no interest in dominating Eastern Europe or the whole of Europe. It did that when it was the Soviet Union and had the military capability with hundreds of deployed combat divisions in Eastern European countries. Today, Russia doesn't have that capability. So, the US and Western premise of portraying Russia and China as global threats is a myth.
The US and China are two powers fueled by two different ideologies. The US ideology of liberal internationalism is on the wane as democracies all over the world are receding and autocracy, authoritarianism and nationalism are dominating the world politics. China's rise is based on the Confucian ideology of peaceful rise. But over time, China's economic capability is giving rise to its military capability based on the pure realistic logic of survival in an anarchic system.
The US also took the same route in becoming the most powerful state. The classic security dilemma guides the US-China relationship in which the rise of a great power instills fear in the mind of the existing power, thus creating global concern and fear of war.
Great powers never fight directly with each other. During the long bipolar period many proxy wars were fought, but the US and the Soviet Union never fought a direct war with each other. Great powers will continue to engage in security competition like both the Soviet Union and the US did during the Cold War, but to imagine that they will ever directly engage in a hot war is a wrong assumption.
Lastly, both the Korean War and the Vietnam War proved costly for the US, as even without directly participating in the war, the Soviet Union and China ensured that the US was not able to achieve its political objectives in these wars. Iran can rest assured that Russia and China, without directly participating in the war, will ensure that its sovereignty and territorial integrity are respected. Iran will pay a cost in engaging in this war, but it will not be the regime change or discontinuity of uranium enrichment for its civil nuclear energy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Opposition leaders in Iran call on Khamenei to step down after US strikes
The leaders of two prominent Iranian opposition factions on Sunday urged supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to step down and spare more bloodshed, in the wake of unprecedented American attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities. Reza Pahlavi, the son of the shah ousted by the 1979 Islamic revolution, and Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the People's Mujahedin (MEK), which is outlawed in Iran, said in separate statements that Khamenei must quit after over a week of war between Iran and Israel. The whereabouts of Khamenei, who has led the country since 1989, are unclear after Israel refused to rule out killing him. The strikes on the Islamic Republic's three nuclear sites are the result of the regime's catastrophic pursuit of nuclear weapons at the expense of the Iranian people. Ali Khamenei and his crumbling terrorist regime have failed the nation. As Khamenei considers how to respond… — Reza Pahlavi (@PahlaviReza) June 22, 2025 Opposition groups claim he is deep underground in a bunker and incommunicado except with a group of his closest aides. "Now Khamenei must go," said Rajavi, saying that Khamenei's "unpatriotic project" had now "all gone up in smoke". "No to appeasement, no to war and yes to regime change -- changing the religious dictatorship by the Iranian people and the Iranian resistance," she said. Pahlavi, who is the figurehead for supporters of the ousted Iranian monarchy, said "the only sure way to achieve peace is for this regime to now end". "As Khamenei considers how to respond from his underground bunker, I say to him: For the sake of the Iranian people, respond by stepping down," he said. In another statement, 2023 Nobel Peace Prize winner Narges Mohammadi, who remains inside Iran on leave from a prison sentence, called Iran's government a "religious, authoritarian, and misogynistic regime". Bur she said she strongly opposed the "devastating and ruthless war" and urged both sides to accept an "immediate ceasefire". "I firmly believe that democracy and peace will not emerge from the dark and terrifying corridors of war and violence," she said. The series of US strikes against Iran "devastated" its nuclear programme, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Sunday, while insisting that Washington was not seeking to oust the clerical leadership.
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Pakistan rejects reports of US strikes via its airspace
Listen to article Pakistani authorities strongly rejected claims circulating on social media suggesting that the country had permitted the United States to use its airspace or territorial waters for military strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, calling the reports "completely false and baseless." The denial comes amid rising tensions in the Middle East following US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. The strikes targeted three key Iranian nuclear sites — Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan — according to US President Donald Trump, who announced the operation on his Truth Social platform. According to the state television PTV, some Indian media outlets have amplified allegations that US B-2 bombers and warships passed through Pakistani territory to reach Iranian targets—claims officials in Islamabad dismiss as deliberate disinformation. 'These reports are part of a broader pattern of false narratives, particularly pushed by certain quarters in Indian media,' a senior government source told Reuters. اسرائیل ایران جنگ سے متعلق چند اہم فیکٹ چیک؛ حقائق اور پاکستان کا اصولی موقف کیا ہے؟ — PTV News (@PTVNewsOfficial) June 22, 2025 In a statement, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) condemned the US attack, labelling it 'a serious violation of international law' and expressing concern about further regional escalation. 'Iran has the legitimate right to defend itself under the UN Charter,' the MOFA said, urging all parties to respect international law and protect civilian lives and infrastructure. The government reiterated its longstanding position of neutrality in regional conflicts and called for restraint and diplomacy. Officials confirmed that Pakistan has not entered into any new military cooperation related to the Iran-US conflict and no request for operational access has been made by Washington. 'Pakistan maintains a policy of non-involvement and supports dialogue as the only sustainable path to peace,' the statement added. Authorities urged both the media and the public to verify all information through credible and official channels, cautioning against the spread of unverified and potentially dangerous misinformation. In contrast, US B-2 stealth bombers reportedly used Indian airspace to carry out strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, according to regional sources cited in multiple reports on Sunday. Read: US B-2 bombers used Indian airspace to attack Iran's nuclear facilities Sources claimed the US Air Force's strategic bombers departed from Guam Island in the western Pacific, passed over the Andaman Sea, and then traversed central Indian airspace before reaching their strike zone near Iran via the Arabian Sea. The route reportedly covered coordinates including 15°N, 145°E (Guam), through 10°N, 95°–100°E (Andaman Sea), crossing 20°N, 75°–80°E (central India), and reaching the vicinity of 25°–30°N, 60°–65°E (near Iran's borders). Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif also strongly condemned the recent US military strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, calling them a serious violation of international law. He conveyed Pakistan's position during a telephone call with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. The US strikes followed eight days of what Pakistan termed as Israel's "unprovoked and unjustified aggression." 'The Prime Minister expressed deep concern that the US attacks had targeted facilities under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),' the statement said. 'These attacks constituted a serious violation of international law and the IAEA Statute,' he was quoted as saying. Washington enters Iran conflict US forces struck Iran's three main nuclear sites, President Donald Trump said in a televised speech late on June 21 and he warned Tehran it would face more devastating attacks if it does not agree to peace. The US strikes included 14 bunker-buster bombs, more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles and over 125 military aircraft, in an operation the top US general, General Dan Caine, said was named "Operation Midnight." After days of deliberation and long before his self-imposed two-week deadline, Trump's decision to join Israel's military invasion against its major rival Iran is a major escalation of the assault and risks opening a new era of instability in the Middle East. "A short time ago, we carried out massive precision strikes on three nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime," he announced. Also Read: Tehran vows self-defence with 'all force' after US strikes three nuclear installations The strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump said in the White House televised address. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Iran's Foreign Ministry has strongly condemned the US military strike on its nuclear facilities, calling the action an unprecedented breach of international law and a grave violation of the UN Charter. In a statement, the Islamic Republic of Iran accused the United States of a 'brutal military aggression' against its peaceful nuclear infrastructure. Tehran held Washington fully responsible for what it called a 'heinous crime' and warned of 'dangerous consequences' stemming from the attack.
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
US urges China to dissuade Iran from closing Strait of Hormuz
WASHINGTON: U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday called on China to encourage Iran to not shut down the Strait of Hormuz after Washington carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Rubio's comments on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo" show came after Iran's Press TV reported that the Iranian parliament approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which around 20% of global oil and gas flows. "I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that, because they heavily depend on the Straits of Hormuz for their oil," said Rubio, who also serves as national security adviser. Iran's top security body to decide on Hormuz closure, Press TV reports "If they do that, it will be another terrible mistake. It's economic suicide for them if they do it. And we retain options to deal with that, but other countries should be looking at that as well. It would hurt other countries' economies a lot worse than ours." Rubio said a move to close the strait would be a massive escalation that would merit a response from the U.S. and others. The Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately provide comment. U.S. officials said it "obliterated" Iran's main nuclear sites using 14 bunker-buster bombs, more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles and over 125 military aircraft. The strikes mark an escalation in the ongoing Middle Eastern conflict. Tehran has vowed to defend itself. Rubio on Sunday warned against retaliation, saying such an action would be "the worst mistake they've ever made." He added that the U.S. is prepared to talk with Iran.
