Missile Shortages and Strategy Gaps: What China Sees in US-Iran War

Amid loud projections of American military strength, President Donald Trump’s offensive against Iran appears to be losing momentum. Tehran continues to exert de facto control over the Strait of Hormuz, turning what seemed like a decisive show of force into a strategic stalemate.

While Washington navigates this uncertainty, Beijing is watching closely, decoding the operational playbook and extracting lessons that could shape its own ambitions, particularly regarding Taiwan.

On March 3, China’s official military outlet, China Military Bugle, outlined five key lessons from the conflict. They are: “The deadliest threat is the enemy within; the costliest miscalculation is blind faith in peace; the coldest reality is the logic of superior firepower; the cruelest paradox is the illusion of victory; and the ultimate reliance is self-reliance.”

Why is internal discipline China’s top priority?

The first lesson—“the enemy within”—resonates deeply with President Xi Jinping’s ongoing purge of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Under an intensified anti-corruption drive, Xi has dramatically reshaped the military’s leadership.

Recent removals of senior figures, including Central Military Commission members Generals Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli, highlight the scale of this effort. In fact, among PLA generals active or promoted since 2022, 41 out of 47 have reportedly been purged or investigated.

For Xi, ideological loyalty and internal cohesion are not optional, they are foundational to military readiness.

Is China losing faith in diplomacy?

The second lesson underscores skepticism toward diplomacy. Iran, after all, was reportedly engaged in negotiations with the United States when it was attacked.

China appears to be drawing a stark conclusion: peace cannot be assumed. Beijing is backing this belief with action, increasing its 2026 defence budget by 7%, allocating RMB 1.91 trillion (approximately $277 billion) to the PLA.

Does superior firepower still decide wars?

The third lesson highlights the enduring dominance of military strength. The coordinated operations by the United States and Israel demonstrate how speed, intelligence, and overwhelming force can neutralize defenses.

China is responding by accelerating modernisation, focusing on mechanisation, informatisation, intelligentisation, and advanced weapons systems.

What does the “illusion of victory” really mean?

The fourth lesson is perhaps the most ambiguous. The “illusion of victory” suggests that battlefield success does not always translate into strategic success.

Despite tactical gains, the US campaign risks long-term instability. Trump’s lack of clearly defined end goals, combined with Iran’s tightening grip on the Strait of Hormuz, illustrates how quickly victories can become quagmires.

Is Taiwan really on a fixed timeline?

Taiwan remains central to China’s long-term strategy. While the PLA’s 2027 centenary milestone has often been misinterpreted as an invasion deadline, US intelligence assessments clarify otherwise: “The Intelligence Community assesses that Chinese leaders do not currently plan to execute an invasion of Taiwan in 2027, nor do they have a fixed timeline for achieving unification.”

However, the broader objective remains unchanged: “China publicly insists that unification with Taiwan is required to achieve its goal of 'national rejuvenation' by 2049…”

This ambiguity continues to raise questions among analysts, including Thomas Shugart, who noted: “One thing that I do find odd… China’s leaders don’t have a fixed timeline… but… insist… unification is required by 2049… 2049 sure sounds like a fixed timeline… I'm confused.”

Why is self-reliance becoming critical?

The fifth lesson—self-reliance—reflects China’s long-standing strategic priority. The latest Five-Year Plan emphasizes “strategic material security,” including stockpiling critical resources.

This is particularly relevant given China’s dependence on the Strait of Hormuz for nearly 45% of its oil imports.

How closely is China studying US military operations?

Former US CENTCOM commander Joseph Votel highlighted the depth of China’s scrutiny: “Well, I think they're paying very close attention… They're learning how we respond to counterfire… following our air tactics… looking at the targets we're going after…”

He added: “They'll be watching… our readiness rates… our ability to marshal forces… So I think they're absorbing a lot just about how we're operating.”

Is the US weakening its Indo-Pacific position?

One key concern for Beijing is the shifting of US military resources. The deployment of forces like the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit from Okinawa to the Gulf signals a potential dilution of American strength in the Indo-Pacific.

Votel noted: “I think they're paying attention to what this is doing to our readiness in other areas… We continue to move resources out of the Asia-Pacific, and they certainly are taking note of that.”

Why are Chinese military movements around Taiwan decreasing?

Recent declines in PLA aircraft activity near Taiwan raised alarms. However, analyst K. Tristan Tang offered a different perspective: “The decline in aircraft sorties likely reflects the PLA's ongoing efforts to explore and refine a new model of joint training.”

He emphasized: “If the PLA's combat readiness had been seriously degraded… we'd expect… smaller [patrols]… The evidence suggests… training reform… may be the more plausible explanation.”

Could decapitation strikes backfire?

China is also studying the effectiveness of leadership-targeting strategies. The US-Israel strikes on Iran provide a real-world test case.

Charles Lyon Jones warned: “For China… the US-led campaign may prove a valuable lesson… But it may yet become a cautionary tale…”

He added: “Assassinating a democratically elected leader… may not coerce Taiwanese into submission, but steel their resolve…”

And further: “If the US and Israel cannot succeed in changing the Iranian regime… he will have little prospect of doing so in Taiwan.”

Is there a looming missile gap?

The conflict has exposed a critical vulnerability: missile defense capacity.

David Axe observed: “The so-far lopsided conflict offers important lessons… It has revealed just how many munitions it takes…”

On defensive shortages, he noted: “US and allied forces have expended perhaps 2,000… missile interceptors… builds at rates far too low to immediately replenish…”

He warned of a strategic window: “That may be the best time for Beijing to strike.”

And concluded: “Thanks to the war on Iran… [the US] simply won't have enough interceptors… Victory in the east is less assured than ever.”

Could prolonged conflict benefit China?

If the US remains entangled in the Middle East, China stands to gain strategically. Sam Roggeveen outlined the risks: “The worst case will be highly advantageous for Beijing… The US may have triggered a cycle of escalation…”

He added: “All these scenarios entangle the US further… and… weaken its deterrent against China.”

(With inputs from ANI)