Editor's note: CGTN's First Voice provides instant commentary on breaking stories. The column clarifies emerging issues and better defines the news agenda, offering a Chinese perspective on the latest global events.

Just days after Washington and Tehran made "significant progress" in the nuclear negotiations in Geneva and agreed to discuss technical details in Vienna, Israel and the US launched what is called a "preemptive strike" against Iran on Saturday.

In the light of the explosions, one thing is brutally clear: This is not a failure of diplomacy; it is an abandonment of it.

Just 48 hours before the first bombs fell, Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi had voiced confidence in reaching a "fair and balanced" solution, acknowledging mutual understandings reached in previous rounds. "Further progress has been made in our diplomatic engagement with the United States," Araghchi said, noting that both sides planned to engage in more "detailed" discussions on nuclear-related steps.

The very fact that talks were ongoing implied a commitment to de-escalation, and the world was watching Geneva, waiting for a deal.

Instead, the international community witnessed a betrayal of process. To strike while diplomats are speaking is not just a strategic choice; it is a profound moral hazard. It signals to the world that American negotiation is merely a stalling tactic, a cover for military buildup.

It confirms that the US seeks regime change, not negotiations for compromise.

Washington's tactic suggests a familiar pattern: an adversary painted as an imminent "threat," a strike described as a necessary act of deterrence, and an underlying assumption that America can manage escalation and shape geopolitical outcomes through force.

But history and reason say otherwise.

Striking Iran is a moral, strategic, and political disaster, one that betrays both lessons of the past and the principles the US claims to defend. It ignores the deeply intertwined cycle of escalation that American policy itself sustains. For decades, Washington's economic sanctions, covert operations, and military encirclement have fueled Iranian insecurity and nationalism.

The 2018 US withdrawal from the nuclear deal, an agreement under which Iran had been verified to be complying, destroyed one of the few diplomatic pathways that had genuinely reduced tensions. To strike Iran just 48 hours after the Geneva talks is to double down on the very failures of American policy that created this volatile environment in the first place.

Furthermore, the idea that the US can bomb its way to security has a long and tragic record. From Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan, wars launched under the banner of deterrence or democracy promotion have instead unleashed chaos, eroded American credibility, and caused immense human suffering.

A strike meant to "deter" could easily become the fuse of a much larger war.

Earlier, Iran had made it clear that it responds to force not with submission but with defiance. The country's parliamentary speaker cautioned before that any US attack would make Israel, along with American military and shipping facilities in the region, valid targets for retaliation. Every missile or drone that hits Iranian targets risks triggering asymmetric attacks on American and its allies' bases.

Iran, with its capable military and deep regional alliances, is no small "adversary." Any strike – however "limited" it may be in Washington's imagination – risks igniting a regional war that draws in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and even the broader Gulf.

At a deeper level, the push toward confrontation reflects America's inability to adapt to a multipolar reality. American policymakers remain bound to an outdated notion of hegemony: that every regional challenge must be met with power projection, every rival deterred through military dominance. This hubris blinds Washington to the shifting dynamics of the Middle East, where regional powers are increasingly shaping outcomes through diplomacy, trade, and strategic partnerships rather than open conflict.

Saturday's attacks have exemplified a dangerous pattern of arrogance and hypocrisy that undermines global stability.

The world needs stability, not clashes. Bombs would kill innocents, displace millions, and crush reform movements. True support means dialogue, not drones for dominance. Respecting Iran's affairs through diplomacy honors sovereignty and averts war – proving strength via restraint, not recklessness.

But sadly, the US has abandoned it.

The author Jianxi Liu is a Beijing-based analyst of political and international relations. With 10 years of experience in media, she writes on topics pertaining to the US, the EU, and the Middle East.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)