Minilateralism's necessary rise

If there was any doubt remaining about the return of great-power politics, it has been dispelled by US President Donald Trump's attack on Venezuela, threats to annex Greenland, and refusal to extend the New Start treaty limiting the nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia.

- PRABHAT UPADHYAYA SALIEM FAKIR

Foreign ministers from India, Egypt, South Africa, China, Russia, Brazil, the United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia and Iran during a Brics meeting in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, in this file photo dated June 10, 2024.

(REUTERS)

Such geopolitical upheavals are driven by "the will to power", as Adam Tooze has pointed out — including "power over resources, purchasing power, the ability to resist the influence of others.The reverberations of this trend are being felt in the architecture of global cooperation, built around the Bretton Woods institutions, under which shared rules and formal governance structures shaped countries' behaviour. Within the "rules-based order", at the heart of which lies the United Nations, cooperation was operationalised through regular engagement, leading to incremental gains. This system often required countries to make concessions and accommodations, but they generally were willing to do so in exchange for long-term stability and predictability.

But this institutional approach to cooperation has broken down in recent years, as institutions have proven incapable of responding effectively to states' evolving needs. From an outdated UN Security Council structure and stalled Rio Conventions to the persistence of longstanding conflicts, evidence of the UN system's limitations steadily accumulated, eroding trust. As gridlock became entrenched, the rules-based order increasingly appeared rigid, unjust, and ineffectual. This demands a fundamental rethink of how states engage with one another to deliver global public goods.