<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-inner-article-top"><h1 class="gmail-">Beijing moves to contain Mossad\u2019s expanding reach in Iran </h1><p class="gmail-">Israeli
intelligence operations inside Iran have alarmed Beijing, which saw
them as a new model of intelligence warfare, prompting deeper
technological, security, and strategic cooperation with Tehran.</p><div class="gmail-another-name"><i><img src="https://thecradle-main.oss-eu-central-1.aliyuncs.com/public/admins/e9183c3e-0c07-11f1-b27f-00163e02c055.webp" alt=""></i><p><a href="https://thecradle.co/authors/nadia-helmy" style="color:rgb(164,4,4)">Nadia Helmy</a></p></div><div class="gmail-another-name" style="margin-top:16px"><p><span style="color:rgb(84,88,94)">FEB 17, 2026 - </span><font size="1"><a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/beijing-moves-to-contain-mossads-expanding-reach-in-iran">https://thecradle.co/articles/beijing-moves-to-contain-mossads-expanding-reach-in-iran</a></font></p></div></div><div class="gmail-inner-article-img"><img src="https://thecradle-main.oss-eu-central-1.aliyuncs.com/public/articles/e2bf6ada-0c19-11f1-816f-00163e02c055.jpeg" alt="" width="496" height="235" style="margin-right: 0px;"><span>Photo Credit: The Cradle</span></div><div class="gmail-inner-article-content"><div class="gmail-row"><div class="gmail-col-md-8 gmail-col-sm-7"><div class="gmail-article-content"><span class="gmail-article-body"><p>Chinese
military experts and intelligence agencies increasingly describe
Mossad\u2019s deep infiltration into Iran as opening a \u201cPandora\u2019s box\u201d of
global security risks.</p><p>From Beijing\u2019s perspective, Israeli and US
intelligence operations \u2013 particularly those expanding after 2015 and
accelerating through 2025\u20132026 \u2013 mark the evolution of a new
battlespace. Mossad\u2019s ability to <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/iran-dismantles-mossad-linked-cell-active-during-12-day-war">embed agents</a>, compromise sensitive databases, disable radar networks, and facilitate precision strikes <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/israel-behind-mysterious-blasts-across-iran-since-end-of-12-day-war-report">from inside</a> Iranian territory is interpreted as a shift toward what Chinese analysts <a href="https://www.spsnavalforces.com/story/?id=802&h=Chinas-Strategy-of-Informationised-and-Intelligent-Warfare">call</a> \u2018Informationized and Intelligent\u2019 Warfare.</p><p>This
represents the convergence of cyber sabotage, internal recruitment,
technological penetration, and operational coordination \u2013 a hybrid model
in which intelligence operations hollow out defensive infrastructure
before kinetic action begins.</p><p>For China, the implications extend well beyond Iran.</p><p><strong>Intelligence warfare as a precursor </strong></p><p>Within
Chinese security discourse, Israel\u2019s operations in Iran are frequently
cited as evidence that intelligence warfare now precedes kinetic
engagement.</p><p>Military expert Fu Qianshao, a former analyst in the
Chinese Air Force, characterized Mossad\u2019s success in planting agents and
disabling Iranian radar and air defense systems from within as a \u201cnew
pattern of intelligence warfare.\u201d The June 2025 Israeli strikes on the
Islamic Republic, which reportedly faced minimal resistance due to
compromised systems, reinforced this assessment.</p><p>Fu argued that
such tactics transcend traditional battlefield engagement. Instead of
confronting air defenses externally, Mossad undermined them internally \u2013
neutralizing deterrence before aircraft entered contested airspace.</p><p>Another
Chinese military expert, Yan Wei, echoed this concern, emphasizing that
the penetration of sensitive Iranian facilities exposed structural
weaknesses rather than merely technological gaps. Legal safeguards and
routine security protocols, he suggested, are insufficient against
intelligence operations that exploit bureaucratic vulnerabilities and
internal access points.</p><p>Professor Li Li, a Chinese expert on West
Asian affairs, has pointed to Israeli cyber operations targeting
research centers and infrastructure as evidence of intelligence warfare
functioning as a force multiplier. Unlike conventional attacks, these
operations blur the line between espionage and sabotage, complicating
retaliation.</p><p>Tian Wenlin, director of the Institute of Middle
Eastern Studies at Renmin University, warned that sustained intelligence
incursions could pressure Tehran to accelerate its nuclear capabilities
as a defensive countermeasure.</p><p><strong>Structural vulnerabilities and strategic lessons</strong></p><p>Chinese
analysts have argued that Mossad\u2019s operations revealed structural
vulnerabilities within Iranian security and administrative systems. In
commentary across Chinese military and policy platforms, the breaches
have been cited as evidence of weaknesses in digital infrastructure and
internal safeguards.</p><p>The breaches exposed weaknesses in internal
vetting, digital security, and inter-agency coordination. In Beijing,
the episode was read as a warning \u2013 a reminder that intelligence warfare
can exploit administrative seams as effectively as battlefield
vulnerabilities.</p><p>If a state with extensive security institutions
can face such penetration, similar methods could target strategic
infrastructure elsewhere, including trade and energy corridors linked to
the Belt and Road Initiative (<a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/:~:text=Iran%2C%20sanctions%2C%20and%20energy%20pressure%20points&text=For%20Beijing%2C%20this%20energy%20corridor,node%20in%20">BRI</a>).</p><p>The
key takeaway in Chinese policy circles is preventative. Sovereignty in
the digital era depends as much on system integrity as on military
capability.</p><p><strong>Iran\u2019s role in Belt and Road</strong></p><p>China\u2019s engagement with Iran rests on <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles-id/5008">long-term</a> strategic planning.</p><p>Iran
occupies a central geographic position linking East Asia to West Asia
and onward to Europe. Maritime routes through the Strait of Hormuz and
Bab al-Mandab remain <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/war-on-iran-the-fuse-to-a-global-crisis">essential</a> to Chinese energy security and commercial flows.</p><p>Instability
inside Iran would ripple across these corridors. For Beijing,
disruptions would not be confined to regional politics; they would
directly affect supply chains and infrastructure investments embedded
within the BRI.</p><p>Chinese officials have therefore consistently
reiterated support for Iran\u2019s sovereignty while opposing what they
describe as unilateral pressure. </p><p><strong>Activating counterintelligence coordination</strong></p><p>As
reports of Israeli intelligence penetration intensified through 2025
and into early 2026, Beijing deepened its counterintelligence
coordination with Tehran. Chinese security institutions moved from
monitoring Mossad\u2019s methods to analyzing their structural implications,
treating Iran\u2019s experience as a live operational case.</p><p>Beginning
in January 2026, cooperation reportedly expanded to include joint
assessments of infiltration pathways, digital vulnerabilities, and
administrative access points exploited by foreign intelligence services.
The breaches were understood not as isolated incidents but as
indicators of systemic exposure requiring institutional response.</p><p style="text-align:justify">Through the <a href="https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2026/02/06/how-chinas-ninth-bureau-counters-mossad-operations-in-mideast/">Ninth Bureau</a>
of the Chinese Ministry of State Security, China began implementing a
comprehensive strategy in January 2026 to dismantle Israeli and US spy
networks in Iran. As China strengthens Iran's digital sovereignty,
Beijing is urging Tehran to abandon western software and replace it with
secure, encrypted Chinese systems that are difficult to penetrate,
essentially building a digital \u201cGreat Wall.\u201d</p><p>The objective
extended beyond immediate breach containment. It centered on insulating
critical infrastructure that underpins Belt and Road trade corridors
from sustained intelligence disruption.</p><p>China also promoted integration of its <a href="https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/iran-abandons-us-gps-china-beidou-middle-east-security/#:~:text=On%20June%2023%2C%202025%2C%20Iran%20formally%20deactivated,completing%20the%20transition%20to%20BeiDou%20for%20both">BeiDou navigation system</a>
as an alternative to western GPS platforms, reducing exposure to signal
interference and enhancing guidance independence for missile and drone
systems. Radar upgrades, including platforms such as the YLC-8B,
reportedly strengthened detection capabilities, including against
stealth aircraft.</p><p>Advanced air defense systems, including the HQ-9B, further reinforced airspace monitoring capacity. Cooperation has also <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/israel-anxious-over-chinese-support-for-iranian-missile-program-report">extended</a> to missile infrastructure components and technical systems supporting deterrence resilience.</p><p>Space-based
surveillance capabilities, linked to Chinese satellite networks,
reportedly enhanced monitoring capacity and reconnaissance support. </p><p><strong>Embedding Iran within a broader security architecture</strong></p><p>Beyond
bilateral coordination, Beijing has sought to situate Iran within
broader multilateral security mechanisms through the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (SCO).</p><p>The SCO\u2019s formal security architecture centers on its Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (<a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/sahand-2025-iran-hosts-first-sco-drill-on-its-soil-marking-a-new-era-in-eurasian-security">RATS</a>),
headquartered in Tashkent, which coordinates intelligence sharing and
counterterrorism cooperation among member states. Although originally
designed to address extremist threats, the framework provides
institutional channels for information exchange on cross-border security
risks.</p><p>Chinese policy commentary has increasingly framed the SCO
as more than a counterterrorism platform. In the context of intelligence
penetration and covert destabilization campaigns, Beijing has
emphasized the organization\u2019s potential as a vehicle for <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/ten-defense-ministers-walk-into-a-room-in-china#:~:text=So%20the%20SCO%20today%20promotes,Russia%E2%80%93China%20get%20on%20board">deeper security coordination</a> and collective resilience against external interference.</p><p>While
the SCO does not publicly maintain a mandate targeting specific
intelligence services, its expanding cooperation mechanisms \u2013
particularly after Iran\u2019s <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles-id/6171">accession as a full member</a> in 2023 \u2013 have strengthened Tehran\u2019s integration into a broader Eurasian security network.</p><p>Embedding
Iran within this framework serves both operational and political
functions: it distributes counterintelligence awareness multilaterally
and signals that intelligence pressure on Tehran resonates beyond
bilateral relations.</p><p><strong>Economic reinforcement and long-term commitments</strong></p><p>Security coordination forms only one layer of Beijing\u2019s approach. Economic integration provides another.</p><p>China
remains Iran\u2019s largest trading partner. Iranian exports to China \u2013
largely energy \u2013 have approached $22 billion annually, while imports
from China stand at roughly $15 billion. The 25-year comprehensive
cooperation agreement between the two countries envisions long-term
Chinese investment in Iranian oil, gas, infrastructure, and industrial
sectors, with projected figures often cited in the $300\u2013$400 billion
range over time.</p><p>In parallel, Beijing has employed <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/swifts-decline-how-global-powers-are-escaping-the-dollar-trap#:~:text=China%20launched%20the%20Cross%2DBorder,SWIFT's%20most%20serious%20rival%20yet.">alternative</a> financing mechanisms designed to reduce exposure to <a href="https://thecradle.co/articles/china-trades-infrastructure-projects-for-iranian-oil-to-bypass-us-sanctions-report">sanctions pressure</a>.
Barter arrangements linking oil exports to infrastructure development
projects, including transportation networks and industrial facilities,
allow transactions to continue outside traditional financial channels.</p><p>Economic
continuity reinforces strategic stability. Trade flows and
infrastructure commitments create buffers that help absorb the impact of
sustained political and intelligence pressure.</p><p></p><div class="gmail-columns-box gmail-web-view-poll"><h2 class="gmail-heading" style="background-image:none"><a>Poll</a></h2><div class="gmail-columns-section"><div class="gmail-columns-row"><div class="gmail-poll-card"><div class="gmail-question">Is China\u2019s expanding security cooperation with Iran a defensive move \u2013 or the start of a deeper geopolitical alignment?</div><div class="gmail-options"><div class="gmail-option" style="background:white"><div style="width:21.62%;height:100%" class="gmail-"></div><div class="gmail-analytic" style="width:100%"></div><div class="gmail-input" style="background:transparent"><label for="option-190" class="gmail-">Primarily about protecting Belt and Road investments</label></div></div><div class="gmail-option" style="background:white"><div style="width:29.73%;height:100%" class="gmail-"></div><div class="gmail-analytic" style="width:100%"></div><div class="gmail-input" style="background:transparent"><label for="option-191" class="gmail-">A step toward a formal China\u2013Iran security bloc</label></div></div><div class="gmail-option" style="background:white"><div style="width:40.54%;height:100%" class="gmail-"></div><div class="gmail-analytic" style="width:100%"></div><div class="gmail-input" style="background:transparent"><label for="option-192" class="gmail-">A necessary defensive response to intelligence warfare</label></div></div><div class="gmail-option" style="background:white"><div style="width:8.11%;height:100%" class="gmail-"></div><div class="gmail-analytic" style="width:100%"></div><div class="gmail-input" style="background:transparent"><label for="option-193" class="gmail-">A calculated move that avoids direct confrontation with the US</label></div></div><div><p style="float:right;margin-top:23px;font-weight:600;font-size:0.875rem;display:block;color:var(--cdl-secondary)"><span>37 votes, </span><span>6 days and 2 hours left</span></p></div></div></div></div></div></div><p></p><p><strong>Diplomatic positioning and strategic restraint</strong></p><p>China
has consistently voiced diplomatic support for Iran in international
forums, emphasizing principles of sovereignty, non-interference, and
opposition to unilateral coercive measures. Beijing has criticized
strikes on Iranian facilities and warned against escalation that could
destabilize regional trade routes. </p><p>At the same time, Chinese
officials avoid language that commits China to direct military defense
of Tehran. The posture is deliberate. China strengthens institutional
resilience, supports technological substitution, deepens economic
integration, and expands diplomatic backing \u2013 while preserving distance
from open confrontation with Israel or the US. Strategic caution remains
central to Beijing\u2019s calculus. </p><p><strong>A layered response in a hybrid battlespace</strong></p><p>Israeli
intelligence operations inside Iran are widely interpreted in Chinese
commentary as illustrative of how modern conflict unfolds. Intelligence
warfare \u2013 combining cyber access, human networks, administrative
penetration, and precision enablement \u2013 reshapes the strategic
environment before conventional escalation becomes visible.</p><p>Beijing\u2019s
response reflects this assessment. Digital insulation, navigation
substitution, radar modernization, satellite-supported monitoring,
multilateral coordination through the SCO, and long-term economic
engagement form a layered counterstrategy.</p><p>In this framework,
resilience takes precedence over retaliation. The objective is to
reinforce systems rather than escalate confrontation.</p><p>China\u2019s
engagement in Iran, therefore, carries dual significance. It reinforces a
strategic partner facing sustained intelligence pressure while refining
Beijing\u2019s own understanding of hybrid conflict and systemic
vulnerability.</p><p>The contest unfolding is structural. Sovereignty in
this environment depends on hardened infrastructure, secure networks,
and institutional coordination as much as on military platforms.</p><p>Containment,
insulation, and calibration define Beijing\u2019s approach \u2013 a measured
effort to limit intelligence penetration while maintaining broader
strategic balance.</p></span></div></div></div></div>
<br></div>