What is the future for multilateralism?

Multilateralism faces its most perilous moment in decades. The war in Ukraine, Brexit and the tensions between China and the US are just some of the challenges threatening to upturn the international order that has developed since the end of the Cold War.  

The United Nations, the institution that most embodies the hopes of international cooperation, is beleaguered. Even before Russia attacked Kyiv, Secretary-General António Guterres echoed his organization’s detractors with his own downbeat assessment: “The problem of the UN is that our multilateralism has no teeth.” The quote provided fuel for those in the media openly asking if the institution is still relevant.  

Some went a step further.  

In an interview with Linda Thomas-Greenfield, United States ambassador to the UN, The Economist posited the idea that the UN is, in fact, “retreating from big-time geopolitics simply because… the way its checks and balances work aren’t sharp or effective enough in the world as it is.” The newspaper went on to suggest that the body’s role is now limited to that of a humanitarian aid organization. Can it be the case that an institution created to prevent war has outlived its usefulness? 

“The UN is in need of very deep reform,” says Ángel Alonso, Vice Dean at IE University’s School of Global and Public Affairs, “but the world would be a much worse place without it.” 

Acknowledging that it should do a better job of explaining what it does, Alonso argues that the UN still has a crucial role to play in global affairs. Far from retreating, he says it should work towards a re-foundational moment – reconsidering concepts such as sovereignty and consensus and establishing more effective governance structures and mechanisms.  

In her straightforward rebuttal to The Economist, Thomas-Greenfield placed similar emphasis on her belief in the institution’s continuing importance: “The UN is what we have. It is the one place where we can all sit at the table together.” 

‘There will come a breaking point’  

Even those who point to the UN’s failures in conflicts such as Syria and Ukraine acknowledge that the shock brought on by the Russian invasion may have the effect of galvanizing the multilateralist cause.  

There is a body of evidence to suggest it is a cause worth fighting for. The much-debated contention that the inability to prevent conflict and enforce its own agreements has undermined trust in the UN is not immediately borne out by research.  

A 2020 survey by Glocalities found that the UN was the most trusted international or governmental institution, with only 29% of respondents saying they lacked trust in the body, while a 2021 Pew Research survey found that a median of 67% of those questioned viewed the UN favorably.  

“The UN is in need of very deep reform, but the world would be a much worse place without it.” Ángel Alonso, Vice Dean at IE University’s School of Global and Public Affairs 

For Alonso, the issue is not so much a crisis of trust in the UN as it is in multilateralism itself — one that needs to be addressed through reform. “We call the institutions global, but they are not global, they are international, with power players and representatives defending national interests. There should be some major reflection in terms of governance at the global level.” 

The consequences of a failure to do so are stark.  

The rise of populist, nationalist and authoritarian leaders around the world lays bare the challenges to globalism, and the competing approaches are unlikely to co-exist forever: “Unless we take serious action, there will come a breaking point,” predicts Alonso.  

Even without considering the catastrophic outcomes of the last period in history when such forces reached their ascendancy, the great challenges of our time – climate change, pandemic, inequality – necessitate a global response. The true failure of multilateralism will become evident only if it cannot endure.