Skip to content
Home » Wang Wen: China’s Perspectives & Role in the Iran War (Transcript)

Wang Wen: China’s Perspectives & Role in the Iran War (Transcript)

Editor’s Notes: In this insightful discussion, Professor Wang Wen joins Glenn Diesen to explore China’s strategic perspective on the war in Iran and its broader implications for the global order. They examine how the conflict accelerates the transition from a unipolar to a multipolar world, emphasizing China’s role as a mediator and advocate for peace amid regional instability. The conversation also highlights the potential shifts in energy security and infrastructure as Beijing navigates the risks and opportunities presented by current geopolitical tensions. (April 20, 2026) 

TRANSCRIPT:

Introduction

GLENN DIESEN: Welcome back. We are joined today by none other than Wang Wen, a professor and dean of Chongyang Institute of Financial Studies and dean of the School of Global Leadership at Renmin University of China. So thank you for taking the time. I know you’re a big voice in Beijing, so I appreciate taking the time to speak with us.

WANG WEN: Thank you. Thank you, Professor Diesen. Every time when I conversation with you, I really enjoy.

GLENN DIESEN: Likewise.

China’s Stance on the Iran War

GLENN DIESEN: Today though, I wanted to focus a bit on how China is affected by the war in Iran because it does impact China in many ways. I guess the very first wide question would be how Beijing interprets this war against Iran. Is it seen then mainly as a regional conflict between the US and Iran, or do you see it in the context of a much wider systemic rivalry that also includes China?

WANG WEN: Well, I think the Chinese government’s stance regarding the current conflict involving the US, Israel, and Iran is very, very clear. China emphasizes a resolution of the dispute through political negotiation and opposes any unilateral military action not authorized by the UN. The Chinese side has repeatedly called for a ceasefire and an end to hostility and advocating for respect for Iran’s sovereignty and legitimate development rights, while opposing the maximum pressure campaign and long-term jurisdiction.

And I think the position adopted by the Chinese government is not only grounded in the principle of international law, but also reflects China’s own strategic interest, specifically its standards as a major energy importer and staunch advocates of multilateralism, and more importantly, I think, originally from the ultimate imperative to safeguard global peace.

Because as a scholar, I must say, in today’s world, there are too many wars. It has been only 37 years since the end of the Cold War. Yet within these 37 years, the world has witnessed the outbreak of at least 150 military conflicts, including the Gulf War, the Yugoslav War, the war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, as well as now in the Middle East. And the vast majority of these military conflicts have involved the US, whether initiative directed by the US, involving US participation, or backed by the US support. The example set by the world’s biggest superpower is quite frankly terrible.

So now you ask how Beijing is thinking? I think consequently, the Chinese strategic community now is focused on the issue that this particular war further disrupted the international order, destabilized the global economy. Furthermore, our focus lies on deeper and more long-term questions. For example, what the international order looks like following the end of the US-Germany peace mechanism, what mechanism be established within the multipolar world, what long-term regional dialogue framework be fostered, how crisis and dispute be truly and foundationally resolved, and what specifically responsibility and contribution must China undertake in this regard? So we think about so many long-term perspectives after the war. So I think this war, yes, maybe it produced a lot of huge influence.

The Shift from Unipolarity to Multipolarity

GLENN DIESEN: Yeah, that’s interesting. Well, let’s call it a contradiction because often in the West, the last 30-plus years have been referred to as an era of stability, a time of peace when there was order and the rule of law. Yet if you look over the past 30-plus years, we’ve seen the Yugoslav Wars, the 20-year occupation of Afghanistan, the illegal invasion of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and I would even put the Ukraine and Iran also in the category of Western wars. But also you can put the genocide in Gaza. I mean, it’s quite a long, long list for an era which we consider to be a period of peace.

But even when this comes to an end, we now see that all the rules seem to be thrown away. That is, from the American side now, they’re shutting down access to international waterways with Cuba, Venezuela, Iran. We’re talking about the destruction of entire civilizations, and it’s quite a brutal language. If this war in Iran is part of the shift from the unipolar to the multipolar world, do you see this war then being an important turning point in the global order?

WANG WEN: Well, first, I cannot speak on behalf of Chinese policymakers, but I can share some popular views on Chinese strategic academy. Now, more and more Chinese scholars believe that the US hegemony has reached its end, that the so-called post-Cold War order is drawn to a close, and that the world is entering a new era of, as you mentioned, multipolar meeting.

And the multipolar era is characterized by at least 2 points. One feature is that the US has totally lost the strategic capacity to dominate the world. It is maybe in the future the US will decline to a regional power, an ordinary regional power, possessing strategic leadership only in some specific region and specific fields rather than on a global or comprehensive level.

You know, now the US is like a decrepit old boss. Look at their alliance. Japan is humiliated. The European country, to be honest, is distorting it, and Canada is pushing back against it, and Israel now is kidnapping it. In a sense, the US is quite a very pity figure, and it is being manipulated by all its former allies.