Opinion Shashi Tharoor writes: Multilateralism isn’t dead

This erosion of multilateralism comes at a time when the world is in desperate need of coordinated action. Conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, and elsewhere rage with little hope of resolution. Trump orchestrated a peace in Gaza, but outside the UN framework. Climate change accelerates, inequality deepens, and technological disruption outpaces governance. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called it a “global crisis”, warning that “geopolitical divides do not allow us to effectively address them”.

So, is multilateralism on the verge of collapse? And can the UN survive the growing diagnoses of its irrelevance?

To answer this, we must first understand what multilateralism has meant — and what it has become. At its core, multilateralism is the belief that global problems (what the late UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called “problems without passports”) require global solutions, negotiated through institutions that give voice to all nations, regardless of size or power. It is a system built on sovereign equality, mutual respect, and the rule of law. The UN General Assembly, where each of the 193 member states casts one vote, remains the most visible embodiment of this ideal.

Yet the ideal has always been tempered by reality. The UN’s structure — particularly the Security Council’s veto power — enshrines inequality. Its resolutions are often non-binding, its enforcement mechanisms weak. The General Assembly, for all its symbolism, is frequently dismissed as a forum for posturing rather than problem-solving. And the Council itself is seen as reflecting the geopolitical realities of 1945, not 2025.

Still, the UN has achieved much. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Climate Agreement —all emerged from multilateral processes. The UN has coordinated humanitarian relief, led successful peacekeeping missions, helped conclude dozens of international treaties, and promoted global health responses. It has provided a platform for smaller nations to speak, and for larger ones to listen — however perfunctorily.

But today, the system is fraying. The decline of US commitment, the rise of regional blocs, and the fragmentation of diplomatic norms have all weakened the multilateral fabric. The US–China rivalry casts a long shadow, with both powers increasingly pursuing bilateral or “mini-lateral” arrangements with like-minded partners. Russia’s defiance of international norms in Ukraine and Israel’s intransigence in Gaza further undermine the credibility of global institutions. Even within Europe, once a bastion of multilateralism, nationalist currents challenge the consensus.

In this context, the UN risks becoming a relic — an institution with noble intentions but limited influence. Yet collapse is not inevitable. Multilateralism may be wounded, but it is not dead. The very fact that world leaders continue to gather in New York, to speak, negotiate, and deliberate, suggests that the need for global dialogue remains. The UN80 initiative, launched this year, aims to streamline mandates, cut costs, and restore public trust. Institutional reform is on the agenda — not as a luxury, but as a necessity.

Moreover, the crisis of multilateralism is not just institutional — it is philosophical. It reflects a deeper tension between global interdependence and national sovereignty, between (in David Goodhart’s formulation) the “anywheres” who thrive in a borderless world and the “somewheres” who feel left behind. Goodhart’s thesis resonates here: The “somewheres,” rooted in place, religion and tradition, are increasingly sceptical of global elites and distant institutions. Their political ascendancy — from Brexit to Trumpism — has reshaped the landscape in which multilateralism must operate.

In this sense, the future of multilateralism depends not only on reforming institutions but on rebuilding legitimacy. It must speak to the concerns of ordinary citizens, not just diplomats. It must demonstrate that global cooperation can deliver tangible benefits — jobs, security, dignity — not just abstract norms. It must become less technocratic and more empathetic.

Interestingly, countries historically resistant to immigration and global entanglements — such as Japan and Hungary — may find themselves better insulated from the backlash. Japan’s cautious diplomacy and cultural homogeneity have shielded it from some of the populist pressures facing Western democracies. Hungary, under Viktor Orbán, has embraced a nationalist posture that rejects multilateral constraints. These models may offer short-term stability, but they also risk long-term isolation.

The challenge, then, is to find a middle path: A multilateralism that is principled yet pragmatic, inclusive yet effective. This requires leadership — not just from the United States and China, but from emerging powers, regional coalitions, and civil society. India, for instance, has an opportunity to champion a more equitable global order, rooted in the values of sovereignty, solidarity, and sustainable development. We can contribute our expertise and leadership to global discussions on issues ranging from cyberspace to outer space.

As the 80th UN General Assembly unfolds, the stakes are clear. The world is not short of crises — it is short of cooperation. The UN may be imperfect; but as the legendary Dag Hammarskjold put it, the UN was “not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell”. It may have been unable to do so on occasion, but it remains the only forum where all nations can come together to address the world’s problems. To abandon it would be to abandon the very idea of our common humanity.

Multilateralism may be fraying, but it is also evolving. Its survival depends not on nostalgia, but on renewal. And that renewal begins with the recognition that in an interconnected world, no nation is truly sovereign unless all are.

The writer, a former UN Under Secretary-General and former Minister of State for External Affairs, chairs the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs