China Tells Washington to Lift the Blockades
Beijing used the UN stage to oppose pressure on Iran and demand an end to US sanctions and threats against Cuba. The two cases are related—but not identical.
China has used its UN General Assembly address to challenge US pressure on two fronts. Vice President Han Zheng called for the sovereignty and security of Gulf states to be respected as the Iran war continues, and demanded that the country threatening Cuba end its use of force and completely lift the blockade and sanctions.
Washington was not named in the Cuba sentence, but the intended target was unmistakable.
The viral summary that China demanded the immediate lifting of blockades on both Iran and Cuba captures Beijing’s overall position, yet compresses two distinct messages. Han’s explicit “immediately and completely” demand concerned Cuba. On Iran, China emphasized sovereignty, de-escalation and opposition to coercive pressure amid the US blockade and war.
Why Beijing links the cases
China presents unilateral sanctions and military blockades as tools by which the United States extends domestic power beyond its borders. Iran and Cuba are useful examples: both have faced long-term US pressure, both retain governments Washington opposes and both depend increasingly on non-Western trade.
For developing countries, Beijing’s argument is that today’s target may be Iran or Cuba, but tomorrow any state could be excluded from finance, shipping or technology without a universally accepted process.
The United States answers that sanctions are not arbitrary punishment. It says they respond to security threats, repression, terrorism, nuclear proliferation or hostile military conduct. Washington also distinguishes the wartime maritime measures around Iran from the decades-old economic embargo on Cuba.
Cuba and Iran are not the same file
The Cuba embargo is a dense body of US laws and regulations with humanitarian exceptions, extraterritorial effects and a long political history. Most UN members repeatedly vote against it, while Washington argues that Havana’s political system and rights record justify pressure.
Iran is in an active conflict with the United States and has restricted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. US measures include sanctions, interdiction and a blockade that Tehran calls illegal aggression. Washington says Iran’s missile, nuclear and maritime activities created the confrontation.
Combining the two strengthens China’s narrative but can hide important legal differences. A newspaper should not treat “blockade” as a single settled category across both cases.
China’s material interests
Beijing buys energy, sells goods and develops alternative payment channels with sanctioned states. It benefits commercially and strategically when partners reduce dependence on the dollar and Western-controlled logistics.
China also wants stable Gulf shipping. It imports large quantities of oil and has no interest in permanent chaos at Hormuz. Its support for Iran therefore has limits: Beijing can oppose US pressure while urging Tehran to restrain attacks that raise Chinese energy costs.
In Cuba, China gains diplomatic influence close to the United States and reinforces its image as a defender of sovereignty. Washington views some Chinese security and intelligence activity on the island with suspicion.
Principle or power politics?
Supporters see a consistent defense of non-interference and UN authority. Critics point to China’s own economic coercion, territorial disputes and pressure on smaller neighbors. Like other major powers, Beijing applies universal language through national interests.
That does not make the sanctions debate meaningless. It means the relevant questions are specific: Who authorized the measure? What conduct is it designed to change? Are civilians bearing disproportionate costs? Is there a credible path to relief?
The humanitarian test
The strongest way to judge sanctions is not by slogans but by design and outcome. Measures aimed at leaders, weapons networks and military procurement can still spill into medicine, food, energy and civilian transport when banks and shippers over-comply. Effective policy needs published conditions for relief, humanitarian channels that work in practice and periodic review. Otherwise sanctions can become permanent economic warfare with no achievable political endpoint.
Reading a fast-moving story
Breaking reports often mix verified events, official claims, anonymous-source reporting and commentary. Those layers should not be treated as interchangeable. A government statement confirms what that government says; it does not independently prove attribution, intent or the full scale of an event. Images, documents and technical records can strengthen a claim, but each can also lack context. The most reliable assessment is therefore provisional and should be updated when named authorities, independent investigators or primary records provide new evidence.
What to watch next
- Whether China offers a concrete US-Iran mediation plan.
- Chinese purchases of Iranian oil and exposure to secondary sanctions.
- UN voting on Cuba and any change in Washington’s policy.
- Chinese support for alternative payment and shipping systems.
- Whether Beijing condemns Iranian attacks as clearly as US pressure.
Is China defending a fairer international order, building a bloc resilient to American power, or using legitimate criticism of sanctions to advance both goals simultaneously?