By Zhang Zhiwen and Li Zhiwei
Over the past month since the US and Israel launched military strikes against Iran, the flames of war have spread across the Middle East, with negative spillover effects continuing to expand. A month of conflict has been enough for the world to clearly see the heavy cost of war. The international community generally expects dialogue and negotiation to press the pause button on the conflict. However, contradictory statements from various parties regarding the talks have further complicated the already volatile situation in the Middle East.
According to the latest reports, the US and Iran are conducting negotiations by passing messages through Pakistan. Pakistan's Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar said in a statement on March 29 that, regarding the peaceful settlement of the conflict, Pakistani leaders have maintained communication with the US leaders, and both the US and Iran have expressed confidence in Pakistan's role in facilitating the talks.
However, judging from the respective statements of the US and Iran, the situation surrounding the negotiations remains shrouded in conflicting narratives. The US side said the indirect talks were making good progress, while at the same time stating that they still have thousands of targets to hit. The US side also claimed that Iran had agreed to most of the content of a 15-point ceasefire plan. The Iranian side, however, has presented a different account. An Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson said on March 29 that the proposals submitted by the US to Iran through intermediaries were too extreme and unreasonable. Iran's parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said on March 29 that while the US was publicly signaling willingness for negotiations, it was at the same time secretly planning ground offensives and putting forward a so-called 15-point ceasefire plan to end the conflict, in an attempt to achieve objectives it had failed to realize on the battlefield.
Looking back at the outbreak of the conflict, the US military action against Iran came suddenly at a time when the two sides had already made progress in negotiations, which has undoubtedly increased the difficulty of returning to the negotiating table. Tracing further back, over the years, from withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal to engaging in so-called threshold negotiations, a series of approaches adopted by the US in its dealings with Iran are essentially aimed at maximizing its own interests through maximum pressure.
From the battlefield perspective, the conflict continues to rage across multiple fronts, and the situation in the Middle East is evolving in an increasingly unpredictable direction. US media reported that American officials revealed the Pentagon is preparing for weeks-long ground operations in Iran. In response, the Iranian side stated that its troops have been ready for such actions for a long time. Israel, for its part, has ordered intensified airstrikes against Iran, continuing to target its military industrial system in a bid to weaken its weapons production capacity. Such tit-for-tat postures and conflicting statements have cast a shadow over the situation in the Middle East.
The protraction of the conflict has placed further strain on the already fragile security architecture in the Middle East, with its impact rapidly spilling beyond the region to affect economies and livelihoods around the world. In today's highly interconnected world, no war remains localized, and its costs will ultimately be borne by the entire international community. Over the past weekend, protests erupted across multiple cities in the US, with millions of people taking to the streets to call for an end to the military strikes against Iran. Among the voices of the protesters are not only dissatisfaction with current US domestic policies, but more importantly, a genuine aspiration for the restoration of global peace and stability.
Every additional day of conflict brings another day of instability to the Middle East. To truly resolve the conflict, negotiation is indispensable, but talks should not be a one-way process in which one side dictates terms to the other. The contradictions between the US and Iran have become entangled with too many complex factors. To restart negotiations, both sides must return to the strategic clarity that war is not the solution.
At present, many countries are making efforts to promote peace talks. China has made it clear that it supports all efforts conducive to easing tensions and resuming dialogue, and has called on all parties to initiate a peace process as soon as possible. A meeting of foreign ministers from Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia began on March 29 in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan, to discuss ways to ease tensions in the Middle East and promote regional stability.
Negotiation remains the ultimate pathway to resolving the conflict. For the US and Iran to truly sit down at the negotiating table is an urgent expectation not only for the Middle East but also for the world at large.
Editor's note: Originally published on people.com.cn, this article is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.