Research centers affiliated with the Chinese People’s Liberation Army are closely monitoring developments in Israeli intelligence strategy, under the leadership of David Barnea, particularly with regard to the militarization of Israeli intelligence and the increasing public attempts to undermine the Iranian regime. We can analyze the stance of relevant Chinese intelligence, military, defense, and security circles regarding Barnea’s recent statements and actions by understanding Beijing’s general analysis of David Barnea’s speech and the Mossad’s intentions. Barnea’s statement that the Mossad’s mission will not end until regime change in Tehran has generated considerable interest in Beijing. Chinese intelligence and security circles view these statements as a qualitative shift in the Israeli Mossad’s operational methods, moving from covert containment operations to an overt strategy aimed at destabilizing states. Beijing perceives this as a direct threat to regional stability and energy supplies. In Beijing, Barnea’s statements about continuing efforts to overthrow the Iranian government are seen as part of a broader Israeli strategy to transform intelligence from a tool for information gathering into a direct operational weapon (the militarization of intelligence). Chinese analysis, both within military and political circles, focuses on the strategic implications and dangers of this Israeli intelligence approach. Regional Stability and China’s Economic Interests in the Region
Chinese circles have been analyzing Barnea’s warnings regarding the overthrow of the Iranian regime. Beijing is closely monitoring Barnea’s statements, made in mid-April 2026, in which he asserted that the Israeli mission would not end until the regime in Tehran was changed. Beijing views this as a factor contributing to the undermining of regional stability. Chinese military circles believe that Israel is no longer content with deterrence but is seeking to reshape the region’s political landscape through covert operations, threatening Chinese energy flows, which rely on Iranian oil exports for 90% of their supply. Beijing took Barnea’s direct warning to both itself and Russia to think twice before assisting Iran in rebuilding its missile capabilities very seriously. The Chinese interpret this as an indication that Israel might consider Chinese assets or technical support legitimate targets in its future operations. At the same time, China expresses skepticism about the feasibility of regime change by Israel. Chinese assessments suggest that Israel’s reliance on intelligence operations. Israel’s reliance on a popular uprising to topple the Iranian regime is a high-stakes gamble that could lead to prolonged chaos and harm (China’s Belt and Road Initiative).
Chinese intelligence circles have coined the term “militarization of Israeli intelligence” to describe the new Chinese perspective on the workings of the Israeli Mossad. Research centers affiliated with the People’s Liberation Army analyze the appointment of Roman Gofman as the successor to Barnea (scheduled for June 2026) as the culmination of this militarization of the Mossad. This shift from intelligence diplomacy to military action is seen by Beijing as transforming the Israeli intelligence agency into a major commando unit aimed at operational integration. Chinese analysts observe that the Mossad has become a direct command arm of the Israeli Air Force, as demonstrated in Operation Lion Rising (June 2026). In 2025, and specifically in the February 2025 war against Iran, Israeli intelligence provided real-time targeting data instead of the usual strategic reports. Chinese intelligence, military, defense, and security circles analyzed this as a new pattern and model for transforming Israeli intelligence into a war machine. This coincided with Beijing’s analysis of how Mossad used its information (whether accurate or exaggerated) to convince the Trump administration of the feasibility of regime change in Iran, which Chinese circles describe as the politicization of Israeli intelligence to serve military objectives. This approach has caused simmering tension between Beijing and Tel Aviv, with increasingly strong Chinese diplomatic condemnations of the assassination of Iranian leaders, which China considers a violation of international law, warning that the militarization of espionage eliminates opportunities for dialogue. China is currently monitoring the situation strategically to understand the extent to which Mossad’s focus is shifting towards its spheres of influence, especially given the strengthening of Israeli defense cooperation with Taiwan, the increasing number of Israeli officials visiting Taiwan, and Israel’s contribution to developing Taiwan’s defense system. The Taiwanese multi-layered missile known as T-DOM and its integration with Israel’s Iron Dome system have angered Beijing, which views it as an Israeli response to Chinese support for Iran.
For this reason, Beijing rejects the principle of the militarization of Israeli intelligence and the Mossad’s field role in this regard, particularly in toppling political regimes and governments. This is especially true given the Mossad’s current director, David Barnea, proposing a plan to incite unrest against the Iranian regime. Beijing has been monitoring reports that Barnea presented a plan to Prime Minister Netanyahu and the US administration aimed at stimulating internal opposition and igniting widespread protests to bring down the Iranian government, coinciding with military operations against Tehran. In this context, Chinese intelligence circles have analyzed the Israeli military-intelligence integration. Chinese analyses have observed deep coordination between the Mossad and the Israeli Air Force in providing precise information for striking vital installations inside Iran, reflecting the approach of the prime minister. David Barnea’s Mossad strategy involved transforming the Mossad into a spearhead in direct military conflict.
China’s (defense and security) concerns regarding the Israeli Mossad’s plan to overthrow the government in Tehran stem from the fear of losing its energy security. Therefore, while China maintains an officially neutral stance, it fears any uncontrolled change in the Iranian regime. Iran is a major supplier of cheap crude oil to Beijing, and the 25-year strategic partnership agreement between China and Iran, along with China’s massive investments in Iran (estimated at $400 billion), leads it to view any attempts to topple the Tehran government as a direct attack on its strategic economic interests within the framework of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. For this reason, Beijing rejects the principle of foreign interference in the internal affairs of states. Chinese political circles support the principle of state sovereignty and openly reject regime change policies led by Western-backed actors. They consider the warnings of Mossad chief Barnea to be part of a dangerous and irresponsible escalation.
Regarding the Chinese intelligence assessment of the success of the Israeli Mossad’s plan to overthrow the Iranian government and political system in Tehran, initial reports indicate that Chinese intelligence, in conjunction with American assessments, observed the Mossad’s failure to ignite the promised internal uprising in the early stages of the war in Tehran. The Iranian power structure remained intact despite the American and Israeli military strikes, which Beijing considers evidence of an Israeli miscalculation of the strength of the Iranian home front. Here, China is not merely observing; it is balancing its economic relations with Israel with the protection of its strategic partner in Tehran, viewing the militarization of the Mossad under its director Barnea, as a factor that increases the likelihood of a full-scale regional war that does not serve Beijing’s interests.
