BEIJING, May 13, 2026 — As U.S. President Donald Trump prepares to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing this week, the shadow of the Iran war looms large over their discussions. While the conflict between Tehran and Washington has not directly involved China, analysts say the war has reshaped Beijing’s strategic calculus in ways that could redefine the global balance of power. With Iran demonstrating how a weaker state can inflict disproportionate economic pain on a superpower, Chinese strategists are now studying whether similar tactics—short of direct confrontation—could pressure the U.S. On issues like Taiwan, trade, or military access in the Indo-Pacific. The Trump-Xi summit, the first between the two leaders since tensions escalated over Taiwan and AI restrictions, arrives at a pivotal moment: Can China exploit the Iran war’s lessons without triggering a broader conflict?
The Iran war has already exposed critical vulnerabilities in U.S. Economic and military deterrence. By targeting oil chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz and disrupting global supply chains, Iran forced Washington to divert resources to stabilize markets rather than escalate militarily. For China, Here’s a masterclass in asymmetric warfare—a doctrine Beijing has long studied but rarely seen executed at this scale. “The Iran war proves you don’t need to win a conventional battle to change the strategic landscape,” said Elisa Ewers, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, in a recent analysis. “It’s about attrition, economic pressure and forcing your adversary to bear the cost of engagement.”
This lesson is not lost on Xi Jinping. As he prepares for high-stakes talks with Trump—who has signaled a harder line on China’s military expansion and AI dominance—Beijing is likely weighing how to leverage Iran’s playbook without provoking a U.S. Response. The stakes are higher than ever: A miscalculation could escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait, where the U.S. Has already demonstrated its willingness to intervene in defense of allies. Meanwhile, China’s recent crackdown on corruption within its military leadership, including the suspended death sentences handed to two former defense ministers in April, underscores the regime’s determination to consolidate control ahead of potential conflicts. With 52% of the People’s Liberation Army’s top leadership reshuffled since 2022, Xi is sending a clear message: China is preparing for a long game.
How the Iran War Redefined Asymmetric Warfare
The Iran war has revealed three critical lessons for China:
- Economic warfare as a deterrent: Iran’s attacks on Gulf oil infrastructure and shipping lanes demonstrated that even a non-nuclear state can disrupt global markets. China, which imports over 60% of its oil, is acutely sensitive to such vulnerabilities. Analysts at the Council on Foreign Relations note that Beijing has already accelerated efforts to diversify its energy supply chains, but the Iran war has sharpened its focus on strategic chokepoints—particularly the Malacca Strait, through which 80% of China’s oil passes.
- The limits of U.S. Military deterrence: Despite its overwhelming firepower, the U.S. Was unable to swiftly neutralize Iran’s asymmetric threats. This has emboldened Chinese strategists to question whether Washington’s deterrence posture in the Taiwan Strait is as robust as assumed. “The Iran war shows that the U.S. Is constrained by its own rules of engagement and global commitments,” said Michael Schiffer, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “China can exploit these constraints by targeting economic lifelines rather than military bases.”
- Survival as a strategic victory: Iran’s ability to endure sanctions and military strikes—without achieving its ultimate goals—has reinforced Beijing’s belief in protracted conflict strategies. China’s own military doctrine emphasizes “people’s wars” and attrition, and the Iran war aligns with these principles. “Xi Jinping is likely studying how Iran managed to survive U.S. Pressure for years,” said Ewers. “This aligns with China’s own playbook for Taiwan: wear down the adversary without direct confrontation.”
Yet the risks are substantial. The Iran war also exposed the dangers of overplaying asymmetric tactics: Iran’s regional allies faced severe backlash, and its economy remains crippled. For China, the question is whether it can replicate Iran’s successes without facing similar consequences. The Trump administration, which has taken a harder line on China than its predecessor, may be less tolerant of economic coercion—especially if it perceives Beijing as copying Iran’s playbook.
Trump’s China Strategy: Hard Line or Negotiation?
Donald Trump’s approach to China has long been defined by transactional realism: leverage economic pressure to extract concessions, while avoiding direct military confrontation. But the Iran war complicates this strategy. Trump’s team is likely assessing whether China could use similar tactics to pressure the U.S. On issues like semiconductor restrictions, Taiwan, or even access to advanced AI models—such as Anthropic’s Claude Mythos, which Beijing recently sought but was denied.
In a recent report, a Chinese think tank representative reportedly requested access to Claude Mythos, citing cybersecurity concerns. Anthropic declined, citing U.S. Export controls. The incident highlights how AI has become a new battleground in tech warfare—a domain where China may seek to mirror Iran’s economic disruption tactics. If Beijing can develop its own AI capabilities while restricting U.S. Access to critical infrastructure (e.g., rare earth minerals, semiconductor supply chains), it could create a digital Strait of Hormuz, choking off U.S. Technological dominance.
Trump’s response to this challenge remains unclear. His administration has signaled a willingness to engage with China on trade, but his rhetoric on Taiwan and military buildup suggests he may not tolerate Beijing’s use of asymmetric tactics. The upcoming summit could test whether the two leaders can find common ground—or if the Iran war’s lessons will push them toward a new Cold War.
Military Purges and the PLA’s War Readiness
As Trump and Xi meet, China’s military is undergoing a sweeping purge. In April, two former defense ministers—Wei Fenghe and Li Shangfu—were sentenced to suspended death penalties (commuted to life imprisonment after two years) for corruption. The move is part of Xi’s broader anti-graft campaign, which has seen over a million officials investigated since 2012. But analysts warn the purges also serve a strategic purpose: ensuring the PLA’s loyalty ahead of potential conflicts.
According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 52% of the PLA’s top leadership positions have been affected by Xi’s shake-up since 2022. The removal of figures like Zhang Youxia—once considered a top contender for succession—suggests Xi is consolidating power to prevent internal divisions during a crisis. “This is not just about corruption. it’s about control,” said a source familiar with the purges. “Xi wants to ensure the military is unified behind his vision, especially as tensions with the U.S. Rise.”
The timing of these purges is telling. With the Trump-Xi summit approaching, Beijing is sending a message: its military is disciplined, and its leadership is stable. Yet the Iran war has also exposed weaknesses in China’s own military readiness. While Beijing has invested heavily in hypersonic missiles and naval expansion, its ability to project power globally remains untested. The Iran conflict may force China to confront whether its asymmetric strategies are sufficient—or if it needs to develop conventional capabilities to match U.S. Firepower.
What Happens Next: Key Watch Points
The Trump-Xi summit will be closely watched for signals on three fronts:
- Taiwan: Will Trump reiterate U.S. Support for Taiwan’s defense, or will he signal flexibility in exchange for economic concessions? China has made clear it will not tolerate U.S. Intervention in a Taiwan conflict, but the Iran war has shown that even limited actions (e.g., blockading the Strait of Taiwan) could trigger a global crisis.
- AI and Tech Warfare: With Anthropic refusing China access to Claude Mythos, will Beijing escalate its push for indigenous AI development—or seek to undermine U.S. Tech dominance through other means (e.g., supply chain disruptions, cyberattacks)?
- Economic Leverage: Can China replicate Iran’s economic warfare tactics without provoking a U.S. Response? The Trump administration may be more willing to tolerate limited disruptions if they serve China’s interests—but the risk of escalation remains high.
The next critical checkpoint will be the June 15 G7 summit in Italy, where U.S. Allies will assess whether Trump’s China strategy has shifted in light of the Iran war. Meanwhile, China’s National People’s Congress will convene in July, where Xi is expected to outline his next five-year military and economic plan. Watch for signals on whether Beijing will double down on asymmetric tactics—or seek a more conventional approach to counter U.S. Power.
Key Takeaways
- The Iran war has given China a case study in how asymmetric warfare can reshape global power dynamics without direct confrontation.
- Beijing is likely studying Iran’s tactics to apply pressure on the U.S. Over Taiwan, AI, and trade—but risks triggering a broader conflict.
- Xi Jinping’s military purges suggest China is preparing for prolonged tensions, with a focus on internal cohesion ahead of potential crises.
- The Trump-Xi summit will test whether the two leaders can find common ground—or if the Iran war’s lessons push them toward a new Cold War.
- Watch for U.S. Responses to China’s potential use of economic chokepoints (e.g., rare earth minerals, semiconductor supply chains) as leverage.
As the world watches the Trump-Xi meeting unfold, one question looms: Can China exploit the Iran war’s lessons without becoming the next target of U.S. Economic warfare? The answer may determine whether the 21st century belongs to a unipolar U.S. Or a multipolar world where asymmetric power plays define the rules of engagement.
What do you think? Will China’s use of asymmetric tactics backfire—or could it redefine global power dynamics? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
–>