It's unclear how everything will ultimately end, but the present trajectory certainly seems to be one whereby China is comprehensively expanding relations with American allies like those in the GCC as part of its ongoing New Détente with the US simultaneously with distancing itself from its traditional Russian, Indian, and Iranian partners that are collectively aspiring to create a third pole of influence for breaking through the bi-multipolar impasse in International Relations.
China's support for that statement would have been cleared with Tehran long ago.
The Chinese are neither oath-breakers nor back-stabbers and, besides, they just signed a hugely profitable, $500 billion development deal–which won't cost Iran a penny our of pocket and will greatly improve the quality of life there.
The joint statement is a masterpiece of diplomatic needle-threading. Notice that, though Iran is mentioned in association with nukes and terrorists, Iran can read that as an offer by the signatories to help with those very problems.
Since most of those problems are caused by the US and Israel, our media invented a perverse interpretation of the statement, as it does with all setbacks, which are coming thicker and faster every day.
The greatest problem with your analysis is treating the GCC as merely US vassals without agency of their own. I don't like to use "agency", but the GCC while being dependent militarily on the US for protection, have their own leverage by being member of the OPEC+. The "woke" driven US imperialism has already begun to put them into State Dept crosshairs and they know their overlords will eventually come from them. The way US sacrifice Europe for the SMO just further proved their worries which is why we've seen a lot of moves to pivot towards China by the GCC. The oil market being unstable due to the war means that the US can't meddle too much into this even if they want to.
Besides, does China really chasing for what you called new detente with the US? Just recently the US widened their ban on semiconductor sales to Chinese companies, even going as far as banning Chinese companies from selling their chip domestically via secondary sanctions mechanism. In August we have that provocative visits by Pelosi which while ended in total failure, is still a sign that the US administration isn't agreement capable. The rise of this "bi-multipolar" Sino-American axis is an unintended results of US de-industrialization which makes them dependent on the former. But does China dependent on the US? No, unless you are one of those people that like to believe dependencies on financial engineering is akin to dependent on oil imports, exactly what most people did irt Russia at the start of SMO. Ultimately, the Chinese know well that the US is incapable of agreement and they are the next target after Russia.
And as Godfree Roberts said, I don't think this is unintentional at all. There have been rumor of Iran-Saudi Arabia rapprochement and China's strategy in the region puts them-along side Russia-as the perfect mediator. Besides, have we seen coverage of the Iranian reaction on this to the Chinese delegation visits that happened just two-three days apart? The fact that China sends Hu Chunhua, a vice premier that dealt with the task of managing foreign trade signal that China is ready to met any demand by Iran if they need any compensation, which I think they do. Fudan University professor calling this strategy "positive incentive", because China itself is not singling out anyone with their deals. If Iran feels they need compensation, they can do so and China will abide to it as long as the demand make sense (which I think they do actually).
China's support for that statement would have been cleared with Tehran long ago.
The Chinese are neither oath-breakers nor back-stabbers and, besides, they just signed a hugely profitable, $500 billion development deal–which won't cost Iran a penny our of pocket and will greatly improve the quality of life there.
The joint statement is a masterpiece of diplomatic needle-threading. Notice that, though Iran is mentioned in association with nukes and terrorists, Iran can read that as an offer by the signatories to help with those very problems.
Since most of those problems are caused by the US and Israel, our media invented a perverse interpretation of the statement, as it does with all setbacks, which are coming thicker and faster every day.
The greatest problem with your analysis is treating the GCC as merely US vassals without agency of their own. I don't like to use "agency", but the GCC while being dependent militarily on the US for protection, have their own leverage by being member of the OPEC+. The "woke" driven US imperialism has already begun to put them into State Dept crosshairs and they know their overlords will eventually come from them. The way US sacrifice Europe for the SMO just further proved their worries which is why we've seen a lot of moves to pivot towards China by the GCC. The oil market being unstable due to the war means that the US can't meddle too much into this even if they want to.
Besides, does China really chasing for what you called new detente with the US? Just recently the US widened their ban on semiconductor sales to Chinese companies, even going as far as banning Chinese companies from selling their chip domestically via secondary sanctions mechanism. In August we have that provocative visits by Pelosi which while ended in total failure, is still a sign that the US administration isn't agreement capable. The rise of this "bi-multipolar" Sino-American axis is an unintended results of US de-industrialization which makes them dependent on the former. But does China dependent on the US? No, unless you are one of those people that like to believe dependencies on financial engineering is akin to dependent on oil imports, exactly what most people did irt Russia at the start of SMO. Ultimately, the Chinese know well that the US is incapable of agreement and they are the next target after Russia.
And as Godfree Roberts said, I don't think this is unintentional at all. There have been rumor of Iran-Saudi Arabia rapprochement and China's strategy in the region puts them-along side Russia-as the perfect mediator. Besides, have we seen coverage of the Iranian reaction on this to the Chinese delegation visits that happened just two-three days apart? The fact that China sends Hu Chunhua, a vice premier that dealt with the task of managing foreign trade signal that China is ready to met any demand by Iran if they need any compensation, which I think they do. Fudan University professor calling this strategy "positive incentive", because China itself is not singling out anyone with their deals. If Iran feels they need compensation, they can do so and China will abide to it as long as the demand make sense (which I think they do actually).