（来源：新华日报） 穆萨维指出，伊朗从不主动挑起战争，此前一直力求避免局势升级、减少伤亡，但美国的行径迫使伊方 改变应对方式。 据伊朗塔斯尼姆通讯社25日报道，伊朗武装部队总参谋长穆萨维24日警告说，若遭受侵略，伊朗将让侵 略者付出惨重代价。 穆萨维表示，域外势力的干涉损害了地区国家的利益，是地区不稳定、不安全的根源。他表示，世界正 在摆脱单极秩序和单边主义，美国不愿接受这一转变，仍试图通过非法手段推行霸权。 （据新华社电） ...

据伊朗塔斯尼姆通讯社25日报道，伊朗武装部队总参谋长穆萨维24日警告说，若遭受侵略，伊朗将让侵 略者付出惨重代价。 美国近期在中东地区大规模集结兵力。美国总统特朗普近日承认，他在考虑对伊朗进行"有限军事打 击"。 （文章来源：新华网） 穆萨维表示，域外势力的干涉损害了地区国家的利益，是地区不稳定、不安全的根源。他表示，世界正 在摆脱单极秩序和单边主义，美国不愿接受这一转变，仍试图通过非法手段推行霸权。 穆萨维指出，伊朗从不主动挑起战争，此前一直力求避免局势升级、减少伤亡，但美国的行径迫使伊方 改变应对方式。 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article expresses concern that the "long peace" lasting 80 years since World War II may be coming to an end, highlighting the fragility of global peace and the need for strategic imagination and national determination from the United States to maintain it [1][2]. Group 1: Factors Threatening Long Peace - Five key factors are identified as threats to the long peace, including severe political division within the U.S. regarding global order maintenance and military overreach exemplified by wars in Afghanistan and Iraq [2]. - The changing balance of power among major nations challenges U.S. dominance, while economic globalization has weakened America's relative economic advantage and ability to control other nations [2]. - A historical amnesia regarding the complexities of preventing war is noted, as those who experienced major conflicts are fading, leading to a lack of sensitivity towards the risks of war [2]. Group 2: Mechanisms Supporting Long Peace - Nuclear weapons and their deterrent effect are highlighted as a primary mechanism preventing major power wars, with the concept of "nuclear peace" emerging since their introduction [4]. - The end of the imperial era post-World War II led to an increase in sovereign states, complicating international relations and reducing the dominance of hegemonic powers [5]. - Economic globalization has created interdependent market systems, fostering cooperation among nations and reducing the likelihood of conflict [6]. - Technological advancements have enhanced interaction and cooperation among states, shifting the dynamics of international relations [6]. - Social media has created an immediate information environment that emphasizes ethical considerations, softening the approach to conflict resolution [6]. Group 3: Implications of U.S. Strategic Shifts - The U.S. is showing signs of isolationism and strategic retrenchment, which could impact its ability to provide international public goods and maintain global order [7]. - The tension between a changing world and rigid worldviews poses a significant threat to peace, necessitating a reevaluation of U.S. foreign policy and alliances [7]. - Economic development and equitable distribution are essential for sustaining world peace, as globalization has created wealth disparities that need to be addressed [8].

Group 1 - The G7 summit will take place from June 15 to 17 in Canada, with significant divisions among member countries on issues like the Russia-Ukraine conflict and climate change, leading to a lack of consensus on a joint communiqué [1][4] - Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau aims to ease tensions with U.S. President Trump and promote trade and security negotiations, avoiding a repeat of the contentious 2018 summit where Trump refused to sign the joint communiqué [1][3] - The summit will feature discussions on various topics, including artificial intelligence, energy security, and global conflicts, with leaders from non-G7 countries like Ukraine, India, Brazil, and Mexico also participating [6][7] Group 2 - The trend of shorter final joint statements has emerged since the 2018 summit, reducing negotiation time and minimizing contentious wording among member countries [7] - The Trump administration's approach has shifted G7's focus back to its original purpose of promoting global economic stability and growth, as indicated by the current agenda set by Canada [7]

Core Viewpoint - China's unilateral opening is a remarkable achievement in modern history, representing a creative breakthrough in the logic and rules of globalization [1][2]. Group 1: China's Unilateral Opening - China's unilateral opening breaks the traditional "reciprocal opening" principle of Western-led globalization, showcasing a proactive approach to lowering tariffs from an average of 15.3% to 7.4% since joining the WTO [1]. - By the end of 2023, China has attracted a total foreign investment of $3.3 trillion, with 660,000 foreign enterprises operating in the country, maintaining its position as the top destination for foreign investment among developing countries for 30 consecutive years [1]. Group 2: Historical Context and Strategic Decision - The decision for unilateral opening was made during a time of significant challenges, including a weak industrial base and low technological levels, reflecting the courage and wisdom of the Chinese government [2]. - This approach is not a passive response to external pressures but a strategic decision based on a deep understanding of international economic dynamics and domestic development needs [2]. Group 3: Continuation of Traditional Open Ideals - China's unilateral opening is an extension and elevation of its traditional open mindset, which has been evident throughout history, from the Silk Road to Zheng He's voyages [3]. - This modern unilateral opening embodies the spirit of openness and inclusivity, linking China's development closely with global progress and challenging traditional protectionist barriers [3]. Group 4: New Model for Global Governance - China's unilateral opening offers a new model for global governance by moving away from "zero-sum" thinking, demonstrating that market openness can lead to "incremental win-win" outcomes [4]. - Initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative and RCEP reflect China's commitment to regional cooperation and participation in global governance, contributing to the UN's 2035 global development agenda [4]. Group 5: Future Directions of Unilateral Opening - Future developments in China's unilateral opening will transition from "factor flow" to "rule-leading," focusing on institutional openness and establishing standards in emerging fields like digital economy and green trade [5]. - The approach will evolve from "economic and trade openness" to "civilizational dialogue," enhancing cultural exchanges and soft power to counter narratives of "China threat" [5]. - China's unilateral opening will shift from merely adopting international rules to contributing Chinese solutions, promoting a more inclusive and equitable global governance framework [5]. Group 6: Conclusion - The essence of unilateral opening is rooted in self-confidence regarding its development path and a belief in human progress, aiming to attract more entrepreneurs, scholars, and media to engage in this significant topic [6].