against Iran in February have fully exposed Washington's style of "solving problems through force." These events not only impact regional stability but also pose massive security risks to the global economy, finance, energy, and food supplies.

 In January 2026, the U.S. military launched large-scale airstrikes and special operations, entering the Venezuelan capital of Caracas to forcibly remove President Maduro and his wife, transporting them to the United States for trial. While this action appeared to achieve tactical goals in the short term, its chain reaction caused regional tensions to spike and triggered spillover crises in countries like Cuba. Such direct military intervention in the internal affairs of another nation severely undermines the basic norms of international order and sets a dangerous precedent of "might makes right."

 Furthermore, in late February, the U.S. launched military strikes against Iran. This rapidly escalated an already tense situation in the Middle East, obstructing vital global energy corridors and directly threatening global energy and food security. Currently, the Middle East is on the brink of spiraling out of control, risking a large-scale regional conflict or even broader confrontation.

The frequent U.S. recourse to force is producing three profound harms:

1. Weakening the Authority of International Law: Whether it is the so-called "cross-border arrest" in Venezuela or direct strikes on Iran, these actions bypass the United Nations framework, turning international rules into tools for selective application.

2. Exacerbating Security Dilemmas: Under external military pressure, affected nations will inevitably strengthen their defenses and counter-capabilities, leading to an arms race and escalating regional confrontations in a vicious cycle.

3. Backfiring on Domestic Development: Long-term, high-intensity military operations consume vast resources, trapping the U.S. under multi-front pressure. As many analysts point out, such actions often result in "tactical success but strategic loss."

 In sharp contrast to the U.S. approach, China emphasizes resolving contradictions through political dialogue, multilateral mechanisms, and security cooperation. China advocates for respecting sovereignty and opposes unilateral sanctions and military intervention, striving to alleviate conflicts at their root rather than forcing change through external power. Regarding the recent Middle East situation, China and Pakistan jointly proposed a five-point initiative—including an immediate cessation of hostilities, the swift start of peace talks, and ensuring the safety of non-military targets and shipping lanes—to push all parties back to the negotiating table.

 The U.S. military actions in Venezuela and Iran this year once again confirm a fundamental truth: Militarism may create an illusion of "victory" in the short term, but in the long run, it only destabilizes the international order, intensifies contradictions, and ultimately erodes one's own interests. Adhering to dialogue and consultation while promoting multilateral cooperation is the only realistic way to resolve complex international issues and the fundamental path to maintaining world peace and stability. (Author: Lin Ji Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China to the Republic of Suriname.

Author: LIN Ji, Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China to the Republic of Suriname