Over the last few months, it has become apparent that large multilateral gatherings have been more in the nature of jamborees with very little to show by way of concrete results. And yet, in what can only be termed as a paradox, there is very little attempt to abandon it by the vast majority of countries. US may well be an exception that proves the rule.
Let us begin with the mother of all international organizations i.e. the United Nations (UN). The demise of the UN has been proclaimed for sometime now; it would seem however that reports of the UN’s demise are exaggerated. China has openly made it known that as the largest contributor to the UN (after the US) it expects either the number one or the number two position in all international organizations. And, by and large, it has succeeded in achieving that objective. The UN General Assembly which took place in September may have been a talk shop, as it always is, but President Trump still found it important to find time and to come and speak at the forum, if only to belittle it. But even President Trump has sent his former National Security Adviser Mike Waltz as American Ambassador to the UN. The UN may be utterly dysfunctional and the UN Security Council totally unrepresentative of contemporary power reality, and yet countries tend to take it seriously than otherwise. And it is not like countries are threatening to leave the UN, quite the contrary. So, what helps explain the allure of the UN? One explanantion is basically a variation of the FOMO or the Fear of Missing Out, and nations as much as individuals are subject to this pervasive logic. The other substantive reason is that leaving a multilateral institution may be easy, but rejoining it at a later time may not always be a cakewalk. Ask the Chinese how long it took for them to accede to the WTO.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) has been moribund of late. Yet the US has appointed a new Ambassador to WTO i.e. Joseph Barloon just a few months ago who during his senate confirmation hearings said that while the WTO is not perfect, it could be useful in advancing American trade interests. This from a country that has singlehandedly blocked the appointment of Judges to the WTO Appellate Body. So, it is clear that even the US does not wish to abandon the WTO altogether.
The case of BRICS, though not technically a multilateral forum, is curious. The Western press previously used to trash BRICS as a talk shop and an anti-Western outfit. But look at the countries queuing up to join BRICS. In 2023 Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and UAE joined. It is hard to see any geopolitical similarity in this group of countries. Some, like Iran, cannot even be qualified as non-West, since they are clearly anti-West! If the BRICS was a useless talk shop, it is hard to see why these countries want to belong to it. As if this were not enough, another 32 countries are reportedly waiting in the queue to join BRICS!
The G20 had a tough meeting recently under South African leadership. Tough, because the US made it clear that it would not send any high-ranking member of its Government to the meeting. The main reason of course was a bilateral dispute between the US and South Africa. Nevertheless, the US has announced that it would be happy to host the G20 meeting next year. While some observers have argued that the G20 has lost a bit of its relevance, the opposite is also arguable. In the absence of the UNSC which is dysfunctional, it is only the G20 which can, if nothing else, pronounce itself on a host of international issues with some credibility.
Climate Change negotiations happen under the umbrella framework of the UNFCCC (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) through Conference of Parties,called COP. The 30th edition of COP just concluded in Brazil recently. This is a multilateral forum from which the US has withdrawn altogether. It may perhaps be a combination of ideology and a firm conviction among some in the US that climate change is a hoax and that fossil fuels are essential for America’s growth and prosperity. The COP 30 meeting in Brazil could not offer a roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels and the COP itself will doubtless continue to soldier on from one place to the next, year after year. Meanwhile, climate change is not waiting for COP meetings and proceeding at a furious gallop.
How to make sense of all this? The inclination of nations to belong to a grouping, any grouping, is atavistic. This primeval diplomatic instinct along with a proliferation of global problems that no one country can solve on its own, will ensure that multilateralism does not simply fade away from the international relations landscape. Multilateralism may have suffered a setback for various reasons, but it is not about to disappear. From India’s perspective, the mantra must be reform of multilateral institutions and a concrete plan to garner support from the Global South whom we can represent and on whose behalf we can then negotiate. In an impending multipolar world order where power is more widely distributed than before, it is only a matter of time before multilateralism rediscovers its mojo and relevance.
Ambassador Dr Mohan Kumar is the Director General of the Motwani Jadeja Institute for American Studies at the O.P. Jindal Global University. Views are personal.
Diplomacy and Geopolitics 