From September 17 to 19, the 12th Xiangshan Forum took place in Beijing. The security conference in China’s capital brought together 1,800 politicians, diplomats and scholars from over 100 countries. No members of the German government were present. However, Sevim Dagdelen, foreign policy spokesperson for the BSW party, was not only able to attend but also to deliver a speech. In her address on the topic “Victory in the Global Anti-Fascist War and the International Order,” Dagdelen rejected the West’s policy of confrontation and war, and called for the establishment of a multipolar world order. Below, we document her full speech.

THE High Representative of the European Union, Kaja Kallas, declared in September 2025 that it was entirely new to her that Russia and China referred to a shared past as fighters against fascism and militarism in the second world war. Russia and China wanted to rewrite history, and the world believed them, according to Kallas.

One could dismiss this statement by one of the EU’s highest representatives as confused or uninformed. What is interesting, however, is that it encountered no objection from the heads of state and government of Germany, France, Poland and Italy. One must therefore understand Kallas’s historical judgment as an expression of an EU policy that seeks to rewrite history in order to flank the preparation for war with historical politics.

In any case, Kallas’s remark is reminiscent of the phrase by the Spanish‑American philosopher George Santayana (1863‑1952): “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” 

The role of the USSR and China in the second world war

When the Third Reich attacked the USSR, 27 million people were killed, the majority of them civilians. In the attack of Japanese militarism on China, 20m people died, among them 16m civilians. The USSR and China bore the main burden in the fight against the Anti‑Comintern Pact, which the Nazi regime and the Japanese empire joined in 1936.

That pact was complemented by the secret German‑Japanese agreement of 1937. Joint plans of military intelligence aimed at dividing central Asia and the Caucasus into German and Japanese spheres of influence. Regarding the USSR, there were, in addition, joint partition plans aimed at creating colonies with the help of separatist and fascist militias in the Caucasus and in Ukraine.

In the new transmitted historical images, the simple negation of history becomes a means to an end — a negation that is intended not only to make people forget the crimes of the Nazi regime and Japanese militarism but above all to seek a revision of the outcomes of the second world war. 

From the Potsdam Agreement to a multipolar world

Eighty years ago, in Cecilienhof Palace at Potsdam, US president Harry Truman, British prime minister Winston Churchill, and the chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the USSR, Josef Stalin, agreed on the Potsdam Agreement. As a consequence, the UN was founded.

Germany and Japan had attempted with their imperialist wars of plunder to subjugate the USSR and China and to divide the countries. Both powers failed due to bitter anti-fascist resistance. On the ruins of the destructive works of the Third Reich and the Japanese empire, a multipolar world was to emerge, not least shaped by the national liberation struggle of colonised peoples.

However, already with the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the US leadership attempted to intimidate their former allies and to establish its own hegemony through “atomic diplomacy.” 

The West as an unwilling midwife of a new epoch

At the end of the cold war, this calculus seemed to have succeeded, and confidently one spoke of the only remaining world power and the “end of history.” However, in these days little remains of that optimism of Nato.

The meeting of heads of state and government under the framework of the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation was received with shock by the Western elites. For now, it is becoming exactly that multipolar world whose prevention over decades had determined its own geopolitical agenda.

Like apprentice sorcerers whose instruments of power slip from their control, US President Donald Trump, with his punitive tariffs against India and — with qualifications — also German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, with the conclusion of the German‑Japanese armaments agreement, have revealed to the world that a departure from colonialism can only be achieved against the West and its leading powers.

Thus, the West has been and is the unwilling midwife of a new epoch. The corresponding German‑Japanese secret protection agreement in the military field was already signed in 2021. Now, after the visit of German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul to Japan in August 2025, the military co-operation between the two countries is to be massively intensified, for example, through the development of the German cruise missile “Taurus” by Japanese companies for the propulsion of the weapons system. 

The return of colonialism in a new form

However, anyone who believes that these setbacks could foster a reversal in the West is mistaken. US President Trump is now attempting to bind all Nato states into a trade war alliance against China, with the goal that trade partners like Germany impose punitive tariffs on Beijing and New Delhi in the range of 50 to 100 per cent.

The pretext is to target Russia — but the real aim, however, is the imposition of a colonial world order. Just as Trump attempts to position Nato against China, this reflection is found in the military domain: since the Nato summit in The Hague in June, China has officially become a target of the military pact.

Through bilateral military agreements by Nato member states with Asian countries and Australia, front states are being attempted that can also provoke conflicts. Germany is among the countries that are going ahead alongside the US, through agreements with Japan, the Philippines and a strategic partnership with Singapore. 

Denial of reality and loss of power

If historians later look back on this time, they will be astonished by how precisely the West, through trade wars and proxy wars, damaged its own interests, and at the same time desperately tried to impose its will on other countries — such as India.

But whoever decides which country may trade with who must accept the accusation of colonialism. It is a mindset that recalls the unequal treaties of the 19th century. At the same time, it is an expression of a backwards-looking policy, for the global balance of power has changed fundamentally.

Neither China nor Russia nor India allows its policy to be dictated any longer by Washington, Brussels, Berlin or Tokyo. The rise of the global South, the West has simply missed.

There is in this indeed something deeply irrational — and yet a piece of dangerous denial of reality. For instead of working together toward a multipolar world and remembering the founding idea of the UN, one gives in to the illusion that one can return to a politics of fragmentation and division — and “ruin Russia,” as the former German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock so unwittingly aptly put it. 

Responsibility for a multipolar world

There is, therefore, more than ever a common responsibility to stand for the equality of sovereign states in this world and for the shaping of a multipolar order. In this world, there is certainly room for many things — but not for the politics of a backwards-looking, nostalgic colonialism.

However, anyone expecting the US to voluntarily give up the concept of global hegemony — in view of plans to station US troops more extensively on the American continent — may be mistaken.

Everything points to a return of the West to a cold war strategy: a strategy of rollback, with new priorities in the world regions. Latin America and a claimed Western hemisphere seem to be the first focus of the US, while in Asia, the Middle East, and Europe, Washington’s allies are placed in the front row, to preserve US resources.

This unavoidably recalls the words of Mao Zedong: “The United States of America are the main stronghold of modern colonialism.”

But the emergence of a multipolar world is irreversible. What matters more and more are partnerships for mutual security and peaceful development to the benefit of all. We have a just world to gain. We should not let this opportunity pass.