"Who said I wouldn't do this?"
On August 27, when asked by reporters why the United States had not yet sanctioned Chinese banks that deal with Iran, Trump responded.
‘Hmm, there’s no need to announce everything, right?’
Just a few days before he made those brazen statements, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced new sanctions against 60 entities and individuals worldwide, including entities and individuals from mainland China and Hong Kong.
The Chinese companies that were blacklisted are accused of assisting in the purchase of sensitive materials or transporting Iranian oil.
According to data from the analytics company Kpler, China is Iran's largest buyer of oil. Last year, China accounted for more than 80% of Iran's total oil exports.
Regarding Trump's latest hint, Lin Jian, a spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, pointed out that we always believe that dialogue and negotiation are the only way to solve problems. China's stance against illegal unilateral sanctions is consistent and clear.
In a press conference this Monday, Besent described the sanctions plan as "cutting off all of Iran's economic lifelines," and also stated that any entity that facilitates money laundering for Iran will be expelled from the US dollar system. The countdown has begun.
Trump's administration has taken a unconventional approach, calling it the "Economic D-Day".
However, The New York Times described the US government's treatment of China as 'cautious'. The Chinese companies that were blacklisted were 'small companies', while major institutions in China's financial system were clearly absent.
Regarding the question of 'why Chinese banks were not targeted', Besson only stated that 'low-key diplomacy' is the best approach. He once promised to punish a major international financial institution, but did not provide any specific details.
Reports and analyses suggest that Basente’s silence regarding China is equivalent to an implicit acceptance of the status quo: maintaining a “ceasefire” with China may be more beneficial than taking stronger actions against Iran.
Despite this, the PRC still made a firm response: China will "take all necessary measures to firmly safeguard its own rights."
Iranian Parliament Speaker Karlibaf praised China's response, writing on social media platform "X": "We welcome China's stance of adhering to principles and refusing to accept illegal sanctions against Iran. The comprehensive strategic partnership between Iran and China is based on mutual respect, cooperation, and a common vision for a multi-polar world. This relationship does not require the permission of anyone."
Trump's remarks come just before the expected meeting between the US and China. Coupled with a series of tariffs and sanctions imposed by the US against China recently, the already fragile relations between China and the US have become even more complex.
Meanwhile, pressure from the US Congress to Trump take action is also increasing, particularly from the hawkish members of the House Committee on Strategic Competition with China.
According to Politico, several committee members publicly supported the implementation of sanctions. Among them was Darin Laihud, a Republican congressman from Illinois. He stated that any country that provides financial support to Iran, including China, must bear the consequences. Sanctions against banks would serve as a deterrent message to Beijing and other parties.
Many lawmakers are wary of further inflaming Beijing’s anger. The districts they represent have been affected by China’s countermeasures against agricultural products and rare earths. Democratic Congresswoman Hily Stevens from Michigan stated that given China’s willingness to “weaponize” rare earths, the United States must have corresponding strategic support.
Washington has also had conflicts with China over issues related to Iranian oil. Around 2012, during the administration of Obama, American diplomats urged China and other countries to reduce their purchases of Iranian crude oil.
In mid-year of that year, China’s Kunlun Bank was listed on the sanctions list due to its business dealings with Iran. Kunlun Bank stated that it had not received any orders from relevant authorities to cease its business involving Iran. American entrepreneur Daley wrote in the media that China’s possession of $1 trillion in U.S. government bonds gives it confidence.
The New York Times believes that the Trump administration did not impose severe sanctions on major financial institutions that could fundamentally disrupt the economic ties between Beijing and Tehran.
Many senior officials who have served in the U.S. government have understood this point.
Denis Wild, who served as the head of China affairs for the U.S. National Security Council during the George W. Bush administration, said on social media that sanctioning a major bank like the Chinese Bank is tantamount to using an “economic nuclear weapon”.
"Washington is extremely unwilling to target China," said Danny Tannabaum, former chief financial officer of the Bush administration and current partner at Oval Advisors. "I believe this situation remains unchanged, particularly during periods when China possesses more leverage than the United States."
"Former Obama administration officials, Richard Nichols, stated: "We haven't shown willingness to risk weakening our economic status for the sake of forcing China banks away from Iran in recent years."
Nife pointed out that Washington imposed sanctions on Oleg Deripaska and Russian Aluminum Corporation in 2018. At that time, the latter was the world's second-largest aluminum producer. With the expectation that major global supply sources might be cut off, the aluminum market became chaotic.
Targeting banks or companies that are crucial to the system could lead to astonishingly significant impacts of different magnitudes.
You will see the market fall into madness, Ni Fei said. "You will see companies fall into madness. You will see insurance companies fall into madness, and banks will fall into madness as well."
Economist Intelligence Unit senior economist Xu Tianchen told The South China Morning Post: 'If the United States takes more stringent actions—such as targeting Chinese large banks or companies—it will definitely lead to tougher responses.' He pointed out that such measures will isolate Chinese large entities that are subject to sanctions from the US financial system.
Xu Tianchen said that if tensions further intensify, China may take measures to block companies from implementing US sanctions.
In May this year, Beijing used this regulatory tool for the first time in response to the sanctions imposed by the United States against Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) Refining and Chemical Co., Ltd. due to the purchase of Iranian oil.
Xu Tianchen added, "China still has the trump card of rare earth export control—and this fact is precisely why the United States dare not go too far."
Cui Shoujun, a professor at the School of International Relations of Renmin University of China, pointed out that Beijing's core goals are to safeguard national energy security, protect the economic interests of Chinese enterprises, and prevent the United States from infringing upon China's economic sovereignty.
Cui Shoujun also pointed out that China can strengthen law enforcement and implement strict review of the final users and purposes for key strategic minerals and rare earths involved in advanced manufacturing, thereby restricting the flow of these materials to certain US defense and high-tech-related entities.
He added that in order to reduce risks, Beijing may accelerate the expansion of the Cross-border Payment System for the Renminbi (CIPS). By increasing bilateral settlement using local currencies, reliance on the US dollar clearing network can be reduced.
