Beyond Trending: What is minilateralism?

In his article, Multilateralism with small and large numbers (1992), Kahler argued that “disguised minilateralism and lingering bilateralism were significant during the years of apparent American hegemony”. He explained the existence of smaller and more informal forms of collaboration between countries alongside the post-war multilateral institutions. For him and others, these early forums were a mixture of multilateralism, bilateralism and also minilateralism.

In recent years, a number of reasons paved the way for the growing expansion of minilateral cooperation. In The New “New Multilateralism”: Minilateral Cooperation, but at What Cost? (2015), Stewart Patrick underlines the failure of formal international organisations to adapt to complex global challenges and growing normative divergences in world politics as some of the reasons behind the rise of minilateralism.

He described minilateral institutions as “flexible networks whose membership varies based on situational interests, shared values, or relevant capabilities”. This flexibility, efficiency, and exclusivity largely associated with what is called the magic number or small size help these forums to adopt a targeted approach towards a pressing issue. 

Minilateralism, a response to multilateral gridlock? 

Minilateral forums are seen as offering an opportunity to governments to navigate the political deadlock, geopolitical divergence and pressure for reform faced by multilateral instituions.

For instance, the G20 was created in 1999 after the Asian financial crisis for the Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors to discuss global economic and financial issues. The idea of BRICS, first mooted by the former chief economist of Goldman Sachs, Jim O’Neill, in 2001, has evolved into an important platform for cooperation among emerging markets and developing economies.

The 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami prompted the four partner countries of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) to cooperate. The partnership has grown into reliable means of cooperation and diplomacy. More recently, emerging security concerns in the wake of the US-Israel war on Iran are seen as providing immediate logic behind the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement. 

Hence, multilateral cooperation provides an opportunity to quickly respond to pressing concerns by avoiding gridlock that often hampered formal multilateral institutions. But does this imply that minilateral cooperation is going to replace the multilateral institutions?   

The interplay between minilateralism and multilateralism 

However, as minilateral groups expand, they appear to confront the problems of coordination and consensus. The expansion of BRICS is a case in point. While the expansion amplifies voice, it also brings greater diversity in interests, which often makes consensus harder to achieve. 

Therefore, scholars argue that minilateralism and multilateralism can be seen as complementing each other. Member states of minilateral forums may turn to multilateral institutions seeking legitimacy for their actions, or larger burden sharing. At the same time, major powers may use minilateral forums to build ties with emerging powers and expand their diplomatic influence within multilateral institutions.

Send your comments to ashiya.parveen@indianexpress.com.

Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for August 2026. Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.

Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.