It is a signal to the US, China - and even ASEAN when Iran bombs Qatar

In an era where shock and retaliation dominate international relations, this act of forewarning was both rare and revealing. Iran wasn’t just retaliating for the U.S.-Israeli airstrikes on its nuclear sites in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—it was sending a message, loud and clear, to Washington, Beijing, and even ASEAN.

Iran’s decision to issue a warning before launching missiles reflects an unusual but deliberate form of restraint. It wasn't an emotional response. It was a calculated signal: Iran has the capability to strike back, but it chooses not to escalate blindly.

Instead of launching a high-casualty attack, Tehran gave President Donald Trump an opportunity to pause. It upheld its deterrence without inviting full-scale war. It maintained strategic ambiguity about its damaged nuclear infrastructure while preserving space for diplomacy.

This is not the behaviour of a cornered regime. It is the move of a country with a long memory and a longer strategy.

While the missiles targeted a U.S. base in Qatar, the real audience included China.

Beijing is Iran’s top oil customer and a critical partner in its energy infrastructure. But it also walks a diplomatic tightrope—it’s in the middle of complex trade negotiations with the U.S. and avoids direct military entanglements.

By limiting the scope of its retaliation and issuing a warning in advance, Iran made sure China was not forced to choose sides. The strike respected China’s preference for stability and allowed Beijing to maintain its role as a silent yet significant arbiter.

From the China-GCC Summit in Riyadh in 2022 to the ASEAN-GCC-China Summit in Kuala Lumpur in 2025, China has carefully positioned itself as a broker of peace and promoter of civilizational diplomacy. Iran’s strategic moderation plays into that framework, reinforcing the narrative that China’s influence encourages restraint.

Beyond the geopolitical calculus lies a critical scientific challenge: understanding what the U.S. and Israel actually destroyed.

The airstrikes reportedly used Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs)—deep-penetration “bunker buster” bombs designed by the U.S. military two decades ago, originally for North Korea. But Iran is not North Korea.

The topography of Iran’s nuclear facilities—buried deep under different geological layers, fortified across scattered terrain—is not compatible with the original purpose of these weapons. That makes the damage assessment complicated, if not impossible, for Western intelligence alone.

This is where China’s nuclear scientists come into play. With advanced subterranean imaging technologies and a proven track record in nuclear diagnostics, China is perhaps the only partner capable of helping Iran truly understand what was hit, what was not, and how to rebuild.

Thus, Iran’s strike on Qatar was not just military—it opened the door to scientific collaboration and strategic recalibration with China.

While the U.S. and China remain central to Iran’s strategy, ASEAN quietly emerges as a third stabilizing force.

Under the current Group Chairmanship of Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, ASEAN has maintained its commitment to dialogue, non-alignment, and regional security. It doesn’t take sides, but it does set a tone—and that tone is one of de-escalation.

For Iran, ASEAN’s consistent advocacy of peace provides diplomatic cover. It lends legitimacy to Tehran’s restrained response and creates a bridge to international platforms where Iran might otherwise be isolated. This is not just about shared oil interests or religious affinity. It is about ASEAN’s credibility as a regional community that can bring together China, the Gulf, and even isolated players like Iran, without descending into military alliances.

It’s also important to understand what wasn’t achieved by the U.S.-Israeli airstrikes. Despite the dramatic optics, there is no independent verification of damage to Iran’s nuclear program. Its facilities are mobile, buried, and decentralized.

In this fog of escalation, Iran appears more composed than its adversaries. It retaliated—but precisely. It sent a warning—but acted. It showed the world that it could strike without killing—and signal without shouting.

By doing so, Tehran retained the upper hand in narrative control. And in the post-truth era of geopolitics, controlling the story is half the battle.

IRAN'S strike on Qatar was not just about hitting back. It was about reshaping how retaliation can look. This wasn’t "shock and awe." This was signal and nuance.

Tehran knows it cannot defeat the U.S. in open conflict. But it also knows it cannot be easily defeated, either. Its ace card—the threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which more than 20 percent of the world’s oil flows—remains intact. But even that option is now handled with caution. Parliament’s approval is still pending. Iran is buying time—testing waters, not burning bridges.

What stands out is the strategic maturity Iran displayed: deterrence without devastation, communication through calibrated force, and retaliation embedded with warning. This is not weakness. This is a different kind of power.

In a world where missiles often precede ministers, Iran has done the unexpected. It warned before it struck. It aimed for a base, not blood. It left a door open for China—and leaned into ASEAN’s principles of dialogue and restraint.

The real clash here is no longer just Iran vs. the U.S. or Israel. It is whether the U.S. and China can manage their broader rivalry without dragging the world into a wider war. And in that delicate balance, Tehran is just one theatre, albeit a critical one.

The bigger picture is this: the age of unilateral force is waning. The future lies in multipolar diplomacy, scientific partnerships, and regional frameworks.

And sometimes, restraint—not retaliation—is the loudest signal of all.

Phar Kim Beng is Professor of ASEAN Studies at the International Islamic University Malaysia and a former Head Teaching Fellow at Harvard University. ** The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the position of Astro AWANI.