So many wild theories and speculations in this thread. Guys, remember, nothing ever happens. I doubt the deep state will allow the hormuz situation to escalate much further. The blockade is against iran oil, china can live without iran oil and will not fight militarily in the middle east for access to iranian oil.
2026 Iran War Strategy and Analysis
- Thread starter plawolf
- Start date
solarz
Brigadier
It's not about living without Iranian oil, it's about protecting Chinese ships and shipping lanes. Does anyone here really believe China is willing to suffer another humiliation like the ?
You are thinking too small, friend. China can humiliate the US, break Western alliances, portray itself as a guarantor of global maritime trade AND protect its shipping simultaneously.
Yes, how is that a humiliation. We really need to stop acting emotional. A ship being seized in 1993 is really not relevant. Humiliation is a word that should be banned on this forum... really, China needs to act rationally and do benefitial things, even if they arent the most domineering or cool
FriedRiceNSpice
Major
Humiliation as a term should not be banned, as it is a highly relevant term when used in the proper context. It is the frivolous use of the term that should be discouraged, ie when used to describe trivialities like Yinhe, Belgrade Embassy bombing, 1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis, etc.
Gamblers are indeed adept at using prospect theory to convince themselves to increase their bets, but this is clearly not the case in China.
China has never intended to be a guarantor of global trade; this is merely a different way of saying "world policeman."
China is only responsible for its own shipping security. The chaotic situation in the Middle East cannot be changed by China alone. It requires all countries in the region to stand up and work together to maintain order. Simply put, China just doesn't want to become the next United States.
solarz
Brigadier
On the contrary, where in most things in life you can play it safe by avoiding risks, war is the one area where playing it safe could have disastrous consequences. Imagine if China played it safe and never entered the Korean War.
The moment China puts a naval presence in the Middle East, Trump and the US gov will announce that they succeeded in forcing other countries to join in the effort of "opening up Hormuz". And the tacit agreement between all major powers in Europe and Asia to "by-stand and not physically involved" would have collapsed. The US would then have the upper hand to persuade the Asian countries (Korea, Japan, India, etc.) to join in the effort in order to balance China. And once the Asian are in the game, the US would have no problem persuading the Europeans to join in.
China is NOT among the countries most vulnerable to Mid-East supply disruption, contrary to popular belief. Many key US allies are much more fragile and much less capable of withstanding the aftermath of this US blockade.
Therefore, there is no need for China to jump the gun so early.
solarz
Brigadier
Tell that to the PLA. They certainly didn’t think those incidents were trivial or frivolous. In fact, those humiliations were instrumental in driving the modernization and reforms that made the PLA what it is today.
solarz
Brigadier
So China should not do anything because Trump might spin it to his advantage? That’s absurd.
Unless Trump TACOs quickly on the blockade, which he might, the deployment of Chinese naval assets to the area is not a question of if, but when.