We know that China would strongly oppose U.S. efforts to get them to cease oil purchases from Russia and Iran. The country promotes its energy security while protecting energy supplies in concert with national priorities. The U.S. is making a concerted effort to stamp out these imports. This new initiative is part of our larger campaign to cut financial aid to both countries’ militaries. In response, China’s Foreign Ministry responded in no uncertain terms, vowing to defend the country’s sovereignty. It further promised to insulate its planning from out-of-state development interests.
Tensions continued to boil when it came to oil, as news broke that in April China was purchasing more than 1.3 million barrels of Russian oil every day. This represented a notable 20% jump from March. This development underscores how important Russian oil, and independent oil, is to China’s long-term energy strategy. China had become the second-largest customer for Russian seaborne crude as of August, after India.
China at times has imported more than one million barrels of Iranian oil on a daily basis. Estimates suggest that direct shipments to China account for 80-90% of Iran’s oil exports. The other strand of US economic policy is through China’s economy, which largely depends on Russian and Iranian oil. This dependence makes China’s domestic policy a foreign relations nightmare, particularly with the United States.
U.S. Demands and China’s Response
The U.S. is already trying to pressure China into halting its oil imports from both Russia and Iran. This campaign seeks to cut the money that fuels U.S. militarism in these countries. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently commented on China’s place on Russian oil purchase exemptions. He honed in on a key point that Beijing loves their sovereignty.
In response to the potential imposition of a 100% tariff on goods imported from China, the Foreign Ministry stated, “Coercion and pressuring will not achieve anything. China will firmly defend its sovereignty, security, and development interests.” This assertion speaks to China’s efforts to balance global geopolitical pressures with their need to maintain firm control over their energy security.
Additionally, these angry responses will have no major impact on the current China-U.S. negotiations underway. Even with rising tensions over Russian purchases of energy, both countries seem determined to move forward with collaborative efforts to address trade problems.
Strategic Importance of Oil Purchases
China’s ties with Russia and Iran are more than transactional. Particularly, it plays a critical role in the political and strategic international relations security environment. The Chinese government views its oil imports as a crucial mechanism for maintaining energy security in an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape.
As Danny Russel, a former U.S. diplomat, stated, China sees itself as “the one holding the cards in its struggle with Washington.” This approach might embolden Beijing to leverage its energy imports as a significant coercive tool. It is made especially timely by the fact that Canada’s provisions of regulatory cooperation—as currently being negotiated in U.S.
Furthermore, Stephen Miller noted that “people will be shocked to learn that India is basically tied with China in purchasing Russian oil.” This is a remarkable statement given the intense competition between the world’s largest oil consumers. More importantly, it underscores China’s decisive role in the global energy marketplace.
Implications for Global Trade
The consequences of China’s resolute support for preserving Oil-for-Goods agreements with Russia and Iran go much further than their bilateral ties. The United States has announced its intention to impose a 25% tariff on goods imported from India. This decision illustrates the broader impacts of energy dependencies via global commerce due to India’s import of Russian crude oil.
Gabriel Wildau warned that realizing threats against China could derail recent progress made in negotiations, potentially jeopardizing any future agreements between Washington and Beijing. He emphasized the need to approach these conversations with a sort of de-escalatory intention to not deepen existing divides.
