A plume of heavy smoke rises over an oil refinery in southern of Tehran, after it was hit in an overnight Israeli strike, on June 15, 2025. Photo: AFP

On Monday, the conflict between Israel and Iran entered its fourth day, with both sides escalating the intensity of their confrontation in a cycle of tit-for-tat violence. The mutual attacks have not only resulted in casualties and infrastructure damage but have also set a dangerous precedent by targeting nuclear and energy facilities, sparking deep concerns within the international community about the potential for the situation to spiral out of control.

Israel and Iran are both important countries in the Middle East. The relationship between Israel and Iran bears on the overall situation of war and peace in the Middle East. The urgent task is to immediately take measures to avoid the escalation of the conflict, prevent the region from falling into greater turmoil, and return to the track of resolving issues through diplomatic means. Member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and Foreign Minister Wang Yi held separate phone calls with the Iranian and Israeli foreign ministers, calling on both sides to resolve differences through dialogue. Relevant parties need to take measures immediately to put a brake on the escalation of the conflict and bring down the temperature of the situation. Russia, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom have also expressed a willingness to mediate. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres wrote on social media: "Israeli bombardment of Iranian nuclear sites. Iranian missile strikes in Tel Aviv. Enough escalation. Time to stop. Peace and diplomacy must prevail."

It is crucial to fully recognize that only by upholding the vision of common security can the legitimate concerns of all parties be thoroughly addressed. Why are maximum pressure and preemptive action not viable paths? The long and troubled history of the Iran nuclear issue itself proves this point. On the surface, the conflict appears to be triggered by the "nuclear" question, but at its core, it is yet another manifestation of a deep-rooted security dilemma. Israel, fearing that Iran's development of nuclear weapons poses a threat to its security, has adopted a "preemptive" strategy. However, its actions that infringe upon Iran's sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity have, in turn, led to greater insecurity for itself. In fact, the moment when the Iran nuclear issue came closest to resolution was not achieved through a "preemptive" strike; rather, it was the result of 13 years of "marathon" negotiations and the greatest collective efforts by the international community, culminating in the achievement of a binding comprehensive agreement in 2015. Had it not been for the US later withdrawing from the deal, and had the agreement been earnestly and fully implemented, both Iran and Israel would clearly be much safer today.

Ancient Roman scholar Marcus Tullius Cicero once pointed out: "Most people think that the achievements of war are more important than those of peace; but this opinion needs to be corrected." The late former president of Israel, Shimon Peres, expressed a similar sentiment: "The real triumph is in the harvest of peace, not in the seeds of another war." The many military conflicts in the history of the Middle East have not quelled disputes; rather, they have planted the seeds for future confrontations. The vicious cycle of violence and confrontation has deepened divisions among countries in the region, making the path to peacefully resolving disputes increasingly difficult. To break free from bloodshed and turmoil, the Middle East must first abandon the old mind-set of "beggaring thy neighbor" and embrace a new security vision that is common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable.

It is important to recognize that, despite differing positions and philosophies among regional countries on security issues, there are still common interests. Only through dialogue, rather than confrontation, can differences and antagonism be reduced and the broadest possible foundation for cooperation be found.

As a country with special influence over Israel, the US should particularly take on its due responsibility as a major power in both words and actions. For a long time, the general impression has been that the US hardly plays a constructive role in alleviating regional conflicts, but it excels at destructive actions. The ongoing fires of conflict in the Middle East are closely related to the "visible hand" of external powers. Many analysts believe that the US attempt to force Iran to yield through "maximum pressure" has been a significant factor in the sudden escalation of tensions between Israel and Iran. In an editorial, Singapore's Lianhe Zaobao stated that Washington had previously given Iran 60 days to reach a nuclear deal, and Israel launched its attack on the 61st day, "showing the diplomatic tacit understanding of both sides playing the roles of good cop and bad cop." A New York Times article last year compared the US to lion, the "king of the Middle East jungle" and Iran to a "parasitic wasp," claiming that in order to "kill the wasp," the US needs to "set fire to the whole jungle." This kind of thinking is extremely dangerous.

The security concerns of Middle Eastern countries need to be addressed, and military force cannot bring peace to the region. This is a common consensus in the international community, including China. Currently, diplomatic means regarding the Iranian nuclear issue have not been exhausted, and a peaceful resolution is still possible. Most importantly, both parties in the conflict and relevant stakeholders should take immediate measures to create conditions for returning to dialogue and negotiation to resolve the issues.