The conflict between the United States and Iran has reached a critical juncture, with negotiations in Islamabad offering a glimmer of hope for resolution. However, the possibility of peace is tenuous, as both sides harbor a deep-seated mistrust of each other and have competing interests. But ending this conflict is a diplomatic imperative as it is essential for regional and global stability.

Having originally left it open whether it would engage in negotiations, the Iranian side told the media on Monday that it will continue to talk with the US.

The talks offer a crucial chance for dialogue but it is clear there is a big divide to be bridged. The US has offered a "very fair and reasonable" deal, according to the US side, though the specifics remain unclear. Iran, for its part, has presented a list of demands, including the closure of US military bases in the Gulf, sanctions removal, Hormuz Strait passage fees and reparations. These demands highlight the complexity of the issues at hand and the need for a comprehensive agreement.

The conflict has already paralyzed trade through the Strait of Hormuz. In the latest demonstration of its blockade, the US has seized an Iranian cargo vessel that departed from China recently.

In reply to related questions at a news conference on Monday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun expressed Beijing's concern over the US action.

We hope that the relevant parties will adopt a responsible attitude, strictly abide by the ceasefire agreement, avoid escalating contradictions or exacerbating regional tensions, and create the necessary conditions for the resumption of normal transit through the strait, Guo said.

Compounding the complications, Israeli leaders have openly declared that a critical moment has arrived, accusing Iran of seeking to overthrow the US and the West. Tel Aviv has also expressed discontent with Washington's demand for a ceasefire in Lebanon.

The United Nations, in particular, should continue to support mediation efforts and provide a platform for dialogue.

The US side should know that its attempts to force concessions are far more likely to harden positions than to bridge gaps. Threats of military action, particularly during a ceasefire, risk deepening mistrust and reducing the space for meaningful dialogue. To move from a fragile ceasefire toward more durable peace, Washington needs to abandon its approach of negotiating while simultaneously escalating pressure. What is required instead is consistency, restraint and a genuine commitment to rebuilding trust — without which the prospects for lasting stability are dim.

The negotiations in Islamabad create such an opportunity for both nations to engage in meaningful dialogue. It is imperative that both sides approach the negotiations with a commitment to compromise.

But it is the US, in particular, as the initiator of this conflict, that must shoulder its responsibility to end it. It should demonstrate that it is willing to negotiate in good faith, as it has repeatedly broken its promises — first by withdrawing from the nuclear deal, then by imposing maximum pressure and launching strikes against Iran in the middle of negotiations, and now by negotiating while maintaining a blockade. When negotiations are treated as tactical tools — to buy time or consolidate leverage — rather than as a genuine pathway to resolution, they are nothing but a hollow exercise for public show.

As Guo stressed, the current regional situation stands at a critical juncture — a transition between war and peace. Now that a window for peace has opened, favorable conditions must be created to bring the conflict to an end as soon as possible.

China supports the relevant parties in maintaining the momentum of both the ceasefire and the negotiations, and it will continue to play a constructive role with the aim of de-escalating the situation and ultimately achieving lasting peace and stability in the region.