
Venezuelan factions unite against US oil license for Chevron
The Biden administration’s decision to grant Chevron a license to resume limited oil production in Venezuela has been met with a rare wave of bipartis…
Independent journalism on global markets, technology, and the forces reshaping the world economy
China has warned the United States that it will take “all necessary measures” to protect its commercial interests if Washington expands its sanctions enforcement against companies doing business with Iran. The statement, issued by the Chine…

China has warned the United States that it will take “all necessary measures” to protect its commercial interests if Washington expands its sanctions enforcement against companies doing business with Iran. The statement, issued by the Chinese Foreign Ministry, signals that Beijing is prepared to escalate a confrontation that threatens to entangle global trade, financial flows, and energy markets already under strain from geopolitical fragmentation.
The mechanics of this dispute are rooted in the extraterritorial reach of U.S. sanctions. Washington uses its control over the dollar-based financial system to penalize non-U.S. entities that deal with Iran, effectively forcing foreign banks, insurers, and logistics firms to choose between the American market and Iranian business. China, as the world’s largest importer of Iranian oil and a major trade partner for Tehran, is the most exposed nation. For years, Chinese state-owned refineries have purchased Iranian crude at discounted prices, using front companies and ship-to-ship transfers to evade detection. The Trump administration, which has pursued a “maximum pressure” strategy on Iran, has repeatedly tightened enforcement, targeting Chinese firms and, more broadly, the financial intermediaries that facilitate Iranian oil sales.
China’s threat of retaliation has moved from diplomatic boilerplate to a substantive policy risk. Beijing can retaliate in several calibrated ways. The most leveragable is to halt or slow its purchases of U.S. agricultural products, which are critical for the Trump administration’s domestic political base. Another option is to impose restrictions on U.S. technology firms operating in China, as it did in past trade spats. A more disruptive move would be to weaponize China’s holdings of U.S. Treasury securities, though this would hurt Beijing as much as Washington by devaluing its own reserves. The least likely but most consequential response would be to formally reject the dollar as the settlement currency for Chinese oil imports, accelerating a process of de-dollarization that Beijing has been tentatively exploring.
The implications for investors and markets are material. A direct China-U.S. sanctions clash would reintroduce a layer of bilateral trade uncertainty that had receded since the 2020 Phase One trade deal. Energy traders will watch for any disruption to the estimated 500,000 to 700,000 barrels per day of Iranian crude flowing to China, a volume that, if blocked, would tighten global oil supplies and raise prices. For multinational corporations with exposure to both the U.S. and Chinese markets, the risk of being forced to choose sides has increased, particularly for financial institutions that handle payments for sanctioned entities. The same dynamic applies to technology supply chains, where firms may face contradictory demands from Washington and Beijing.
Ultimately, the standoff over Iran sanctions is less about oil than about order. The United States is asserting its right to police the global financial system; China is contesting that right and testing the limits of the dollar’s hegemony. Neither side can afford a full rupture, but both are now openly positioning for a deeper conflict. For markets accustomed to a stable framework of trade rules, this escalation represents a structural shift toward more fragmented and less predictable commerce. The question is no longer whether retaliation will come, but how precisely it will be calibrated and how long it will last.
Source & Credits
Originally reported by Financial Times.
Written for Il Progresso by Xiaoyu Zhao.