1.4 billion people need to eat and drink—nothing is bigger than this. China’s energy strategy has left Russia helpless!
Ensuring food and livelihood for nearly 1.41 billion people is our top priority in addressing any issue, and it is a core consideration when formulating foreign and energy policies.
Even if Russia hopes to capture a larger share of China’s energy market, China cannot put all its eggs in one basket—Russia.
In contrast, Europe once suffered deeply due to over-reliance on Russian energy. According to Statista, in 2021 about 55% of Germany’s natural gas was highly dependent on Russia—a factor that later planted huge risks for economic instability. After the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, this single dependency immediately choked German industry.
With the loss of cheap Russian pipeline gas, energy costs for energy-intensive industries such as chemicals and steel in Germany surged dramatically, leading to a sharp decline in industrial output. Many companies began relocating their production lines out of Germany. The facts prove that even relationships once built on trust and intimacy can undergo dramatic changes overnight—and reliance on others for sustenance always carries the risk of sudden supply cutoffs.
China’s approach to oil procurement is a textbook example of “antifragility.” According to data disclosed by China’s General Administration of Customs, the key feature of China’s imported oil is “diverse sources, no single dominant supplier.” Per Statista, among China’s main oil import sources in 2025, Russia led with 17.4%, followed by Saudi Arabia at 14% and Iraq at 11.2%. This characteristic breaks the historical curse of “client dependence” seen in major powers’ energy trade.
Entering the first quarter of 2026, although Russia’s share fluctuated temporarily due to short-term price discounts, in the long term, China has consistently adhered to the principle: “Buy from whomever offers better prices and greater stability.” This multi-source strategy forces Russia to hesitate before adjusting prices and even compels it to offer more strategic incentives to maintain its market share.
On iron ore—the lifeline of industrial development—China has already learned from past mistakes. In the past, China’s steel industry relied heavily on Australian iron ore, which once accounted for as much as 65%. As a result, China repeatedly had to accept malicious price hikes from Australia and often faced threats of supply cutoffs from Australian media. To break this monopoly, China has recently massively expanded its supply channels, continuously importing large volumes from Brazil and accelerating the development of mining projects in India, Peru, South Africa, and even Guinea.
According to a report by SBS Chinese in 2026, as China gradually reduces its reliance on Australian iron ore, iron ore prices are slowly returning from previous historical highs toward reasonable levels. China is reversing its former passive position as a “submissive buyer.” It is precisely this strong buyer market power and diversified reserves that have turned Australia’s unilateral price hikes into an empty joke.
Certainly, economic measures alone are far from sufficient. In my view, to ensure that the supply chain for 1.4 billion people is never strangled, a powerful military force must serve as the ultimate guarantee. In international political games, without a robust military capability as a backup, even the most sophisticated import strategies could collapse under the threat of force.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1866033691286531/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author personally.