Will multilateralism survive?

Flawed but essential, multilateral forums require cooperative frameworks if they must result in global stability.

As the new year dawns, optimism often fills the air. People set new goals, embrace fresh opportunities and look forward to growth. But this spirit of renewal and progress is not mirrored in the state of global diplomacy. In fact, the multilateral world finds itself at a crossroads, struggling to remain relevant and effective.

The crisis facing multilateralism has been years in the making. Critics of the system argue that multilateral engagement is often a distraction, an ineffective process that dilutes meaningful action.

They champion bilateralism or direct negotiations between two nations as a more pragmatic approach to solving problems. Multilateral forums are accused of fostering stagnation, producing watered-down resolutions and failing to make significant strides on core global issues. And while some of these critiques carry weight, they miss an important point: multilateralism, despite its flaws, remains indispensable.

The East Asian Summit and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meetings continue to serve as critical platforms for regional cooperation. NATO summits, the G20 presidency and other multilateral venues still command global attention.

The problem is not the existence of these forums but rather the way they operate. The negotiation of vague language, the expansion of mandates and the dilution of focus in many groupings all hinder progress and fail to address the urgent challenges facing the world.

A glaring example of these systemic shortcomings was the Summit of the Future held in September 2024. This event, which was billed as a major opportunity, included discussions on critical issues such as climate change, development, peace and security and the sustainable development goals.

Despite the significance of these global issues, the UN’s skewed decision-making processes were not adequately addressed. Reforming the UN system, especially to ensure a more inclusive and less power-concentrated structure, remains a critical need that has been largely ignored by those in these power centres.

Historically, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (the P5)—the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom—have been reluctant to support meaningful reforms to the multilateral system. These powers built the current world order and have a vested interest in maintaining it.

Yet, since 2020, several countries have begun to call for change. Notable discussions include: “Upholding the UN Charter,” initiated by Vietnam on 9 January 2020; “Upholding Multilateralism and the UN-Centred International System” convened by China on May 7, 2021; “New Orientation for Reformed Multilateralism” organised by India on December 14, 2022; and “Effective Multilateralism through Defence of the Principles of the UN Charter”, convened by Russia on April 24, 2023.

Of these visions, China chooses to focus on the centrality of the UN system as it stands today, referring to the continued relevance of the P5. The Russian Federation differs a little from its global east neighbour, stating that while the principles of the UN charter need to be adhered to, there is a yawning gap in the system that requires urgent attention and necessary change.

The Indian version comes closer to the Russian one, which states that the normative process of engagement is necessary but systemic change
is equally important if the multilateral world would want progress in
its engagements.

While there is a grudging acceptance of the need for change, even among the Western states, on-ground action in terms of working towards an alternative mechanism is lacking from them. There are also civil society actors who demand change while continuing to uphold the UN system at its core and would be interested in keeping the UN system in the current structure.

This inconsistency and a lack of action from major powers is a critical obstacle to achieving a more functional and representative multilateral system.

New initiatives, such as China’s Global Security Initiative and Global Development Initiative, show that states are beginning to focus more on norm development and its implications for regional security.

India’s call for a “New Orientation for Reformed Multilateralism” (NORMS) further signals the desire for a fresh approach to global cooperation. However, as new multilateral groupings, like the G20, BRICS and the Quad emerge, they often do so in a piecemeal and temporary fashion, carving out niches that fail to address the larger structural issues plaguing the multilateral system.

These smaller groupings, though important, cannot replace a unified, comprehensive multilateral framework. Whether it’s the US, China, India, or Russia, each power has its own vision of what multilateralism should look like. As these visions collide, the world risks fragmenting into competing spheres of influence, with no clear path forward.

The success of multilateral diplomacy in the past was rooted in the shared recognition that working together offered long-term benefits for all. The world was more economically unstable, and global cooperation was often seen as a means to secure a better tomorrow. Today, however, State actors are more focused on short-term strategic gains, and the prospect of a better, more unified future seems distant. Yet, the truth remains: if nations continue to prioritise narrow national interests over collective global welfare, the consequences will be felt by all.

Despite the many challenges, there is still hope. Countries must recognise that the future of multilateralism is not about preserving the status quo but about evolving to meet the needs of a rapidly changing world. Improving international norms and creating frameworks for cooperation that extend beyond strategic alliances will not only benefit national interests but also create a more stable and equitable global order.

However, achieving this vision will not be easy. Geopolitical tensions, such as the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Israel-Palestine situation, have further complicated multilateral discussions. The return of Donald Trump to US politics could add another layer
of uncertainty.

Yet, these challenges should not deter nations from working together. Transnational issues—climate change, pandemics, security threats—require collective action. And to tackle these issues, nations must find common ground, not only with their strategic partners but also with their adversaries.

In the coming year, world leaders face a stark choice: continue down the path of fragmentation and disunity, or find a way to rebuild a more inclusive, effective multilateral system. The stakes have never been higher. Multilateralism is not just a nice-to-have; it is an essential tool for safeguarding global stability and securing a better future for all. The time for meaningful action is now.

(The author is an assistant professor at the Kautilya School of Public Policy)