Lead
China has taken an unprecedented step in its economic confrontation with the United States, ordering its citizens and companies not to comply with US sanctions against five Chinese refineries accused of handling Iranian oil. The order, issued Saturday by China's Ministry of Commerce, marks the first application of a law designed to counter what Beijing views as "long-arm jurisdiction" by Washington.
Coverage Comparison
Reports from multiple news outlets confirm that China's Commerce Ministry issued a "prohibition order" stating that the US sanctions "shall not be recognized, enforced, or complied with." The ministry said the sanctions "improperly" restricted normal trade and business activities, violating international law, and that the order was issued to safeguard China's "national sovereignty, security, and development interests" as well as the lawful rights of Chinese citizens.
The order targets five refineries: Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) Refinery, and four independent "teapot" refineries — Shandong Jincheng Petrochemical Group, Hebei Xinhai Chemical Group, Shouguang Luqing Petrochemical, and Shandong Shengxing Chemical. These companies were blacklisted by the US Department of the Treasury last month, with Washington accusing them of generating hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for Iran's military through crude oil purchases.
According to the US State Department, the sanctions are part of "decisive action" to disrupt Iran's illicit oil trade, holding Iran and sanctions-evading partners accountable as long as oil revenues fund "destabilising activities" in the region.
Key Claims
- China's Ministry of Commerce has ordered that US sanctions against five Chinese refineries "shall not be recognized, enforced, or complied with," as reported by multiple sources.
- The US Treasury imposed the sanctions on April 24, accusing Hengli of being "one of Tehran's most valued customers" and of generating hundreds of millions of dollars for Iran's military.
- China's Commerce Ministry says the sanctions violate international law and lack UN authorization, an assertion carried by several outlets.
- The order is the first use of a measure designed to block "improper" foreign actions, according to analysts cited by the South China Morning Post.
- Russia's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova welcomed China's decision, condemning unilateral sanctions as "brazen interference" in sovereign countries' affairs, a remark reported by TASS.
- China is Iran's largest trade partner and the biggest buyer of Iranian oil, with Chinese buyers receiving over 80% of Iran's oil shipments in 2025, a fact mentioned in some reports.
Perspectives
Beijing's perspective: China's Commerce Ministry frames the sanctions as an "improper" extraterritorial application of US law that violates international law and basic norms of international relations. The order is positioned as a defensive measure to protect national sovereignty and development interests, with officials emphasizing China's consistent opposition to unilateral sanctions lacking UN authorization.
Washington's perspective: The US State Department describes the sanctions as "decisive action" to disrupt Iran's illicit oil trade, arguing that Iran's oil revenues fund destabilizing activities in the region. The Treasury's designation of Hengli as "one of Tehran's most valued customers" underscores US concerns about the scale of the trade.
Moscow's perspective: Russia's Foreign Ministry publicly supports China's move, with spokeswoman Maria Zakharova calling the decision "entirely justified" and condemning unilateral sanctions as "illegitimate" and a form of "brazen interference" in sovereign countries' affairs. This alignment highlights a converging Sino-Russian stance against US sanctions policy.
Analysts' perspective: Commentators cited by the South China Morning Post suggest the order could be a potential headache for US sanctions enforcement, marking a new stage in Beijing's pushback against American long-arm jurisdiction. The deployment of China's anti-sanctions law, which allows businesses to sue for compensation if they suffer losses from complying with foreign sanctions, adds a legal dimension to the confrontation.