Editor's note: The world has undergone many changes and shocks in recent years. Enhanced dialogue between scholars from China and overseas is needed to build mutual understanding on many problems the world faces. For this purpose, the China Watch Institute of China Daily and the National Institute for Global Strategy, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, jointly present this special column: The Global Strategic Dialogue, in which experts from China and abroad will offer insightful views, analysis and fresh perspectives on long-term strategic issues of global importance.

World War II did not erupt in a vacuum. It was the culmination of unresolved structural tensions that had festered since the end of World War I. Chief among these were unchecked ideological extremism, a collapsed balance of power, and resurgent economic nationalism and protectionism.

Eighty years have passed, and some structural patterns have resurfaced with unsettling familiarity. The world today exhibits troubling parallels to the conditions that preceded World War II, particularly in the resurgence of zero-sum strategic thinking, the intensification of military buildups and the retreat from economic globalization. The return of Cold War-style logic is evident in the Western framing of international politics. In this Western worldview, one state's gain is inherently another's loss, leaving little room for cooperative security or shared prosperity. This mindset has fueled a renewed emphasis on spheres of influence, alliance blocs and coercive diplomacy, mechanisms that historically have escalated, not mitigated, conflict.

As in the interwar years, when military buildups deepened mistrust, today's world is witnessing a similar pattern. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, global military expenditure reached a record $2.7 trillion in 2024, marking the 10th consecutive year of growth. This surge is not confined to traditional military powers, as other countries are also investing heavily in advanced weapons systems, cybercapabilities and space-based defense platforms. The pattern recalls the interwar arms races that destabilized regional balances and heightened perceptions of insecurity.

Echoing the protectionist wave of the 1930s, global trade is again showing signs of retrenchment, a fragmentation trend that is often termed "deglobalization" nowadays. The World Trade Organization data indicate that the share of trade in global GDP has stagnated since 2008, while foreign direct investment flows have declined by over 30 percent from their pre-financial crisis peaks. Supply chain "decoupling" and the weaponization of trade — through sanctions, export controls and tariffs — are eroding the interdependence that once underpinned economic stability.

These situations may not predetermine a major conflict, but they surely recreate a strategic environment marked by mistrust, competition and diminished institutional cooperation. Thus, the imperative to prevent another systemic conflict is as urgent as ever. The historical record shows that wars of such magnitude may emerge when exclusionary ideologies, rigid alliances and zero-sum competition override dialogue and cooperation. Opportunely, a growing number of states are currently advancing initiatives that prioritize diversity, inclusivity and pragmatic engagement among civilizations — principles that, if strengthened, could help to avoid another cataclysm.

Among these states is China, which has articulated a suite of proposals seeking to anchor multipolar cooperation in cultural, developmental and security domains. In 2023, China proposed the Global Civilization Initiative, calling for respect for civilizational diversity, the promotion of shared values of humanity and the deepening of cultural and people-to-people exchanges. This complements its global development and security initiatives. Global Development Initiative, launched in 2021, seeks to accelerate the United Nations 2030 Agenda through cooperation in poverty reduction, food security, public health and digital connectivity. The Global Security Initiative, announced in 2022, emphasizes indivisible security, peaceful dispute resolution and opposition to Cold War mentalities.

Other examples of multipolar or multilateral cooperative efforts are also visible. The BRICS+ framework has expanded to include new members from Africa and the Middle East, promoting South-South cooperation in trade, finance and technology. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, originally centered on security and counterterrorism, has progressively widened its mandate to encompass economic integration, infrastructure connectivity and cultural exchanges among Eurasian states. By institutionalizing regular dialogue between major powers and smaller states, the SCO offers a mechanism for diffusing tensions through consensus-building and non-alignment with any single bloc. Both BRICS+ and the SCO demonstrate that inclusive, flexible platforms, that are rooted in mutual benefit rather than ideological conformity, can create conditions for sustained peace and shared development even in an era of heightened geopolitical rivalry.

The UN Alliance of Civilizations continues to foster interfaith and intercultural dialogue, recognizing that long-term stability is inseparable from mutual understanding among societies. Regional bodies such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations champion "centrality" as a stabilizing, inclusive principle, ensuring that no single actor dominates decision-making in Southeast Asia's evolving security and economic architecture. These initiatives share the common thread of resisting the polarizing logic of "with us or against us" and instead cultivate open frameworks where cooperation can coexist with diversity of political systems, cultures and strategic orientations.

Maintaining global peace and development in the context of major-country competition requires a deliberate strengthening of such platforms. This means expanding their thematic scope to address cross-border challenges that cannot be solved unilaterally, such as climate change, pandemics and digital governance. It also means enhancing institutional capacities to monitor, mediate and resolve disputes, as well as embedding development cooperation in confidence building. Ultimately, the strategic value of BRICS+, the SCO and similar arrangements lies not only in counterbalancing great-power dominance, but in constructing resilient networks of trust, interdependence and shared problem-solving. In a multipolar century, these qualities may prove more decisive than raw power in preventing systemic breakdowns and ensuring that competition remains bounded by the imperatives of human security and collective prosperity.

The underlying ethos of these initiatives — that no single model of governance, development or security can dominate a diverse world - offers a vital counterweight to the exclusionary logic that has historically driven great-power conflict. Sustainable peace requires more than deterrence; it demands an architecture of trust. If we fail to learn the hard lessons of the 20th century, we may be condemned to relive them in the 21st — this time with consequences even more far-reaching.

The author is an associate professor of international relations at the Metropolitan Autonomous University and a senior fellow on China at the Mexican Council on Foreign Affairs. The author contributed this article to China Watch, a think tank powered by China Daily. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily. 

Contact the editor at editor@chinawatch.cn.