Year: 2025

In the early hours of June 13, Israel’s F-35 fighter jets took off quietly, with B-2 stealth bombers flying in formation at high altitudes. Tomahawk missiles were launched from the sea in rapid succession, targeting Iran’s critical infrastructure—nuclear facilities, radar stations, underground command posts, and air defense nodes. For 72 hours, Iran’s military capabilities collapsed, and its command centers became paralyzed. The entire Middle East waited for Beijing’s response, but Beijing remained silent.The Foreign Ministry issued its usual scripted response: “China is deeply concerned” and “opposes violations of Iran’s sovereignty.” Xinhua quietly relayed the message, without strength or impact. On June 14, Wang Yi spoke with the Iranian foreign minister, using the phrase “clearly condemn,” which sounded like an attempt to show support. But less than 24 hours later, Wang Yi spoke with Israel’s foreign minister, and his tone softened dramatically. He merely said “opposes the use of force” and didn’t dare to utter the word “condemn.”Join this channel to get access to perks:

Once upon a time, “Long Live China-Pakistan Friendship” was a diplomatic slogan used by Chinese state media to spread across the globe. From helping build dams and high-speed rail projects to jointly developing fighter jets, Pakistan has long been China’s most trusted “iron brother” and a core customer for military exports.But this time, Pakistan has not chosen China.On May 29, Pakistan’s second “Babur-class” corvette, PNS Khaibar, ordered from Turkey, completed port testing and left Istanbul, officially starting sea trials. This was not an ordinary ship trial; it represented a $1.5 billion strategic shift: four corvettes were all ordered from Turkey, leaving Beijing with nothing.What’s even more ironic is that Pakistan has indeed used Chinese ships in the past. Back in 2017, they introduced four 054A/P class frigates from China—larger, more powerful, and delivered more quickly, at a cheaper price. But this time, they chose the inferior, assembled “Babur-class”. So, the question arises: why did China lose to an “assembled product” when their ships had better performance, lower prices, and quicker delivery?