Global governance is increasingly constrained by three interconnected traps: a shrinking supply of international public goods as U.S. global leadership recedes, a growing crisis of public trust in governments and institutions, and the rising power of AI firms that outpaces effective regulation. Together, these trends weaken the ability of states and international institutions to address major transnational challenges, from security and public health to climate change and artificial intelligence.

As international conflicts intensify amid a weakening global order, China has expanded its mediatory diplomacy. This diplomacy is comprehensive and structured, encompassing three reinforcing components: peace-brokering roles at different levels, a conceptual framework in the form of the Global Security Initiative (GSI), and an institutional foundation in the form of the International Organization for Mediation (IOMed). Together, these components offer a robust and systematic framework for addressing varied international conflicts.

Great powers can explore paths toward peaceful coexistence. The most important lesson of the Reykjavik Summit in 1986 was not that competition can be eliminated but that it requires clear boundaries. The real challenge is not the removal of differences but preventing their escalation into conflict.

As more countries seek to break free from external constraints and assert greater control over their own development and security agenda, the global wave of strategic autonomy is increasingly challenging the post-Cold War order and reshaping the international system.

Iran is increasingly reorienting its foreign policy and economic strategy toward China and Eurasia, using expanded overland transport and energy links through Central and South Asia to reduce its vulnerability to sanctions and maritime disruption. This shift aligns with Beijing’s push for deeper trans-Eurasian connectivity and positions Iran as a more important partner in China's efforts to integrate the Eurasian continent through infrastructure, trade, and energy networks.

In recent years, Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) has re‑emerged as a central theme in artificial intelligence research and technology policy debates. In contrast to “narrow artificial intelligence” tailored for specific tasks or application scenarios, AGI is conventionally conceptualized as a general‑purpose intelligent system capable of cross‑domain learning, reasoning and adaptation. Its potential impacts are regarded as extending far beyond individual industries or technological spheres, and will profoundly reshape economic structures, social governance, and even international power configuration. For these reasons, AGI is no longer merely an engineering or academic problem, but has gradually evolved into a political‑economic issue of paramount strategic importance.

After years of observing U.S.-China dialogues on artificial intelligence, one pattern is hard to miss. The agenda has actually expanded over the past two years. From military AI to frontier model risks, from biosecurity to cybersecurity, the topics under discussion are not few. Disinformation, however, has barely entered the conversation, let alone become a subject of cooperation. In existing international discussions, it usually surfaces as accusation. I want to ask whether it can move from being a topic of accusation to being a problem the two countries handle together.

Despite intensifying U.S.-China competition in AI, both countries share a strong interest in cooperating on AI safety, as advanced and potentially misaligned AI systems could pose existential risks to humanity. Joint risk assessment, coordination against malicious AI actors, and expanded academic collaboration could help reduce these threats and improve global AI governance.

The startling breakthrough moment in artificial intelligence and the commensurate concentration of power into the hands of a few tech giants may lead to an intensification of geopolitical competition. China is positioned to play a major constructive role for the well-being of humanity.

The “Epic Fury” military strikes launched by the Trump administration against Iran have dragged the United States into a strategic dilemma rarely seen since World War II: Bogged down in a war of attrition by a regional power wielding asymmetric tactics, it can neither prevail nor fully withdraw. Its military cards are nearly played out, European allies have drawn clear lines, Middle Eastern partners simmer with resentment and the space for diplomatic maneuver has shrunk dramatically.