If someone leans on a stick while walking, he is described as needing others, and likewise if he leans on another person, he is seeking the help of others along the way.
This exact meaning was present in the mind of the decision-maker in Washington, when he asked China to exert pressure on Iran to pressure the Houthi group in the south of the Red Sea. The administration of US President Joe Biden must have understood such a meaning from the beginning, and had been aware of it since it decided to strike the group’s sites in Yemen.
However, it appears that Washington carried out what is called a “situation assessment” after launching the strikes, and it became clear to it that Beijing’s route to Tehran and from there to Sanaa, where the group’s members have resided since 2014, is shorter than the path of the strikes, in addition to the fact that the road that passes through China to Iran and then to Yemen is less costly at the economic level, despite its multiple curves and twists.
In mathematics, we know that a straight line is the shortest connecting two points. This is an accurate mathematical rule in theory. But in a case like the Houthi attacks on tankers passing through the Red Sea, it becomes clear that this is not the appropriate rule, and that another, non-straight path is the shortest to reach the desired point.
It is not only a twisted and winding road, but it is a path that goes straight to the correct location. Washington knows that it is knocking on the right door to address the problem of the attacks. Every time one looks at American policy here in the region and around the world, he realizes what is exactly said about Washington: it does not take the right path until it has tried all the wrong ones.
When the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia warned of the danger of the group since its members entered Sanaa in 2014, the administration in Uncle Sam’s country paid no heed, and treated the matter as if it concerned the Kingdom and no one else. Riyadh did not despair and repeated the alert on every occasion, while the US administration kept turning a blind eye to the Saudi warnings.
Today, Saudi Arabia must be watching the American request to China, and thinking of the poet who kept advising his people, but they did not listen to his advice until it was too late.
But why is the government of Chinese President Xi Jinping in particular required to tell the administration of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei about Biden’s wishes? Why did the American administration not resort to another government other than the Chinese government in Beijing?
China is not the only country whose trade passes through the Red Sea, as we all know that 12 percent of the world’s trade crosses this path, so does 40 percent of trade between the south of Asia and the north of Europe.
There are two reasons: the first is that China has strong ties with Iran, and that, by virtue of this relationship, it sponsored the agreement that was signed on March 10, 2023 between Tehran and Riyadh. Since that time, it has continued to back the arrangement and monitor the extent of compliance with it, especially by the Iranian side.
This is the first reason why the line is open between Beijing and Tehran, and makes the Chinese able to talk to the Iranians and be heard. It is also no secret to anyone that the axis that comprises Russia and China internationally also clearly includes Iran, and therefore, there is a common language that can be understood by the Iranians when the Chinese speak.
The second reason is that China’s trade passing through the Red Sea to Europe is mostly the largest, for nothing but the fact that the Chinese economy is the second biggest in the world. Most of its movement is with the European Union economy, and this would make the stability of trade in the Red Sea a Chinese economic priority that surpasses the economic interest of any other country.
This was crystal clear to all who have read a recent report by Reuters, quoting Chinese officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity and revealed the details of a message to Iran regarding the need for stability in the Red Sea. They did not talk about politics, but rather used their usual language of economics, which they wanted to convey to the office of the Iranian spiritual leader.
China’s trade with the Old Continent cannot tolerate turning around Africa as an alternative route to the direct passage in the Red Sea. Such route not only takes a longer time but is also more expensive. As there is no justification for taking a longer time, nor paying a higher cost, the government in Beijing has communicated this message to Iran, as reported by the agency.
The Chinese memo arrived in Tehran, with a warning that harm to Chinese trade in the Red Sea in any way will, in return, be reflected in the relations between the two countries. As you can see, this is diplomatic rhetoric on the outside, but in its content lies a message that the Iranian government must understand and therefore must deal accordingly with the group on the land of Yemen.
The truth is that the United States is not harmed economically by the Red Sea attacks as it may seem at first glance, and that the attacks even benefit it in terms of weakening its opponents, but this is certainly another story.
