China has responded to the expanded American sanctions on Iran, several of whose newly designated entities are based in China, Al Jazeera reports.
Lin Jian, a foreign ministry spokesperson, told a briefing in Beijing on Tuesday: "Cooperation between China and Iran has always been conducted within the framework of international law and should not be interfered with or disrupted." He added: "China has already stated many times that it firmly opposes illegal unilateral sanctions … China will take all necessary measures to firmly safeguard its own rights and interests."
This is the sentence the whole campaign turns on
We reported on Monday that the measures are aimed at any country whose banks, businesses or airports deal with Iran, and that China is the destination for the overwhelming majority of Iranian oil. That made Beijing's response the thing to watch, and this is it.
Read carefully, the statement does two things. It asserts that Chinese trade with Iran is lawful under international law, which is the standard objection to secondary sanctions: they apply one country's law to transactions conducted entirely outside it. And it promises unspecified counter-measures.
What it does not do is say China will stop buying. That is the practical answer to the American campaign, and it was not given.
The gap between a statement and an outcome
Governments make these declarations; individual firms make the decisions. A Chinese refiner or shipping company weighing continued Iranian business is weighing its own exposure to the American financial system, not its foreign ministry's position on international law.
That is how secondary sanctions have worked in the past, and it is why the effect of this package will show up in shipping data and refinery purchases over months rather than in a briefing room this week.
Majidreza Hariri, president of the Iran-China Chamber of Commerce and Industries, called the American action an "economic war", which is close to the language Washington itself has used.
What we could not establish
We could not establish which Chinese entities were designated or how many, whether any Chinese firm has changed its behaviour, what counter-measures Beijing is contemplating, or current volumes of Iranian oil going to China. We verified this account from a single publication, which does not name the sanctioned entities.
