Ishaq Dar's visit to Beijing, five-point declaration and China's possible role: Can China become a 'guarantor' to prevent a war with Iran?

 Ishaq Dar's visit to Beijing, five-point declaration and China's possible role: Can China become a 'guarantor' to prevent a war with Iran?

 

The war between the US and Iran is now five weeks old, and the world is now looking to China in the context of this tension.

The five-point joint statement issued yesterday after Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar met with his Chinese counterpart emphasized an immediate ceasefire, the start of negotiations, the protection of civilian infrastructure and critical installations, and the security of key shipping lanes such as the Strait of Hormuz.

Although the statement offers broad diplomatic proposals, it does not explicitly mention direct Chinese mediation. It should be noted that China, which is the largest buyer of Iranian oil and relies on the Gulf’s sea lanes, considers the current crisis in the Middle East a serious threat to its economic interests.

Nevertheless, Beijing’s attitude appears to be particularly cautious. China has neither offered to host the talks nor has it made any open attempt to mediate between the parties so far.

In such a situation, the question arises as to what is China’s role in the Iran-US talks, especially when Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, despite his failing health, immediately reached Beijing after consulting with his counterparts from Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt?

Why is China not openly mediating so far and would China be willing to play this role if the Iranian government needs a ‘guarantor’?

prepared, in which no country is criticized by name, but rather global principles have been emphasized that are important for the stability of the international political system.’

According to Pakistani politician and foreign affairs expert Mushahid Hussain Syed, Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar’s visit to Beijing, which took place after consultations with his counterparts from Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt in Islamabad, reflects three important points.

According to him, second, it is a clear message from both Pakistan and China that the two countries have very close coordination and consultation at the highest level on strategic issues. This shows their close relationship and convergence of interests on key regional and global issues.

Third, the importance of Ishaq Dar’s visit is that China and Pakistan are sending a message to both the US and Iran that ‘look, we are here to help and can play the role of a bridge to end the war.’

He says that for this reason, the five-point statement issued after the important meeting in Beijing has been very carefully prepared, which does not criticize any country by name but emphasizes such global principles that are important for the stability of the international political system, such as the supremacy of the United Nations, the rule of law, a comprehensive peace settlement, an immediate ceasefire, and an end to the bombing of civilian infrastructure, etc.

According to Mushahid Hussain, Pakistan and China have tried to prove through this declaration that they can adopt a neutral and principled stance without becoming a supporter of any one side and can play the role of a bridge between Washington and Tehran.

“In the current situation, this is a role that no other country is playing except Pakistan and China.”

China’s possible role in Iran-US talks

According to Pakistan-China Institute Chairman Mushahid Hussain Syed, China emerges as an important party in the current situation in the Gulf.

He says that the main reason for this is China’s broader economic interests. ‘China is not only an important trading partner of Iran but also of major Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, due to which it has significant economic, political and strategic interests in the region.’

According to Mushahid Hussain Syed, the second reason is that China is also benefiting from the current situation to some extent, especially in the context of the shift from petrodollar to petroyuan in the global financial system.

He gives the example of the fees imposed by Iran on ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz, which, according to him, is being paid in yuan instead of dollars. According to Mushahid, this is a development that indicates a change in the global financial balance.

According to Mushahid, China is also an important player in the broader contex

In the context of tensions between Iran and the United States, he points to President Trump’s expected visit to China on May 14 and 15, saying that “Beijing will want the conflict to be over by then.” Mushahid believes that China, which sees itself as a leader of the Global South and a close friend of Iran, will not want to give Trump a warm welcome in such circumstances when Iran is being bombed.

Why is China not openly mediating?

According to Einar Tengen, Beijing’s cautious approach is not just silence but a ‘thoughtful strategy’.

He said that mediation is meaningless without trust and that Iran views Western negotiation processes with suspicion based on past experiences, so China is avoiding becoming a prominent part of a process that could also fail.

 

He says that the Chinese diplomatic model is different from Western or colonial intervention. According to him, China sees peace as a process of mutual respect for sovereignty and security, rather than imposing it through external force.

According to Einar, China is avoiding putting itself in the center of a conflict where the parties are stuck in their most rigid positions. Instead, it is presenting itself as a platform where regional countries such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt can play a more active role.

“In short, China is avoiding openly mediating or leading the process because it believes that taking a premature central role could damage its long-term credibility.”

However, he makes it clear that the challenges facing China are not just strategic but structural. According to him, the biggest obstacle is the deep-seated lack of trust between Iran and the United States, which mediation alone cannot overcome.

According to him, China rejects coercive diplomacy, which strengthens its long-term credibility, but it does not have the ability to force the parties to an agreement.

Einar also considers the complex situation in the region as an important factor, where not only Iran-US relations but also Gulf security, Israeli policy and regional unity are affected.

Einar says the Trump administration is making signs of easing tensions, but Iran does not fully trust them based on past experiences, which has created a mutual distrust where even genuine diplomatic efforts have limited impact.

Another problem, he says, is the expectation gap, as many observers still expect China to play the role of a traditional superpower mediator, while Beijing’s model is different.

Is China a ‘guarantor’?

There is a lot of talk in the international media about third-party guarantees in the Iran-US deal... Can China play this role and will both Tehran and Washington accept it?

According to Mushahid Hossein Seyed, the biggest problem today in the issue of third-party guarantees is the severe lack of trust between Washington and Tehran. ‘This trust gap has arisen because Iran has been betrayed by the US twice. The US has launched wars against Iran twice.’

 

‘Therefore, Iran will neither believe what the US has said nor consider its private assurances to be sufficient. Iran needs a strong guarantor.’

Mushahid Hossein Seyed believes that China can play this role because it is an economic superpower, a permanent member of the UN Security Council and an important economic player in the region. In this context, China’s guarantor role may be acceptable to both Tehran and Washington.

Professor Shoaib says that China’s limited role is to strengthen the peace process and maintain contact with the Iranians. “China cannot be a full-fledged guarantor, but it can influence Iran and strengthen the peace process.”

In this regard, Einar believes that the concept of providing a guarantor as a third party is theoretically consistent with China’s perspective, but in practice it is a complicated matter.

He says that China has the ability to build trust due to its economic power, diplomatic relations with Iran and a policy of non-interference. However, the real issue is not capacity but acceptance.

“Iran may see China as a major country that is outside the Western pressure system, but it may be difficult for the United States to accept its rival in this role.”

He adds that the lack of trust is so deep that a single country’s guarantee will not be enough. An effective and workable solution will likely require a multilateral system that includes several regional and global powers.