INTRODUCTION
Recent events at the worldwide level, including the election of President Trump, Europe after Brexit, the emergence of regional powers like Russia and China, Arab spring, the 21st century has assisted during a renewed keenness for discussions on the international configuration of power. They have all served to foster notions about whether states will retreat into independent, isolationist strategies and far away from the multilateralism that has long been a key variable in facilitating cooperation between states.
Further, the structure of the international system at a given point in history will impact if and the way how states use multilateralism as a technique, what kind of reasonable order states strive to create and negotiate, and what norms are going to be focused on by those states that make up multilateral arrangements and institutions. If the world is entering a multipolar era, from the international theory what insights are often drawn? How can we work together to ensure multi polarity becomes a vehicle for sustainable development and durable peace?
WHAT ARE MULTILATERALISM, MULTIPOLARITY AND POPULISM?
Multilateralism is a means through which states pursue their interests, and whether or not a state will partake in intensive or weak multilateralism can shift depending on strategic preferences[1]. Whereas, Populism defined by Scholar Weyland[2], political strategy through which a personalistic leader seeks or exercises government power supported directly, unmediated, un institutionalized support from large numbers of mostly unorganized followers.
A multipolar system may be a system in which power is distributed at least among 3 significant poles concentrating wealth and/or military capabilities and able to block or disrupt major political arrangements threatening their major interests. Poles are very often regional powers with a worldwide outreach. ie: India, China, Brazil versus Japan. The modern history of Europe as an example has been characterized by several multi-polar moments[3].
FROM INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM, HOW STATES USES MULTILATERALISM AS A STRATEGY
Multilateralism could be a selected [state] strategy. States do not choose strategies lightly and so, the proliferation of multilateralism within the international system may be a clear indication that states have identified the strategy as producing payoffs. The strategy of multilateralism can change. Strategies are meant to evolve because of the defined interests of a state change over time[4]. Underlying John Ruggie’s conception of multilateralism is the idea of “architectural form”, a deep organizing principle of international life[5]. As an organizing principle, the institution of multilateralism is distinguished from other forms by three properties: indivisibility, generalized principles of conduct and diffuse reciprocity.
1. To understand the indivisibility, the commercial policies of Nazi Germany will be good. By, the multilateral commercial regime, centred on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade(GATT) of 1948, used the principle of most-favoured nation (MFN). In the GATT, third parties were treated in a more inclusive manner and were granted equal treatment by virtue of the MFN clause. Thus, the German system was built around systematic discrimination, whereas the GATT assured nondiscrimination for all contracting parties. Insecurity arrangements, peace is treated as being indivisible, such that no participating member can be at war while others are at peace.
2. Diffuse reciprocity, For instance, in the collective security system outlined previously, members do not expect to be compensated for the military resources they may expend in defending a threatened member country. Their recompense lies in the knowledge that should they be attacked, they too will benefit from a collective response to that attack.
3. Principles of conduct, a variety of methods for ensuring compliance are available, such as through peer review, which may suit more-informal arrangements, or the creation of a formalized body to which grievances could also be taken[6].
TO ENSURE MULTIPOLARITY BECOMES A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND DURABLE PEACE
Multilateralism might function as the basis for a multipolar global order that accentuates more cooperative than conflicting problems. Although both concepts are rooted in distinct modes and objectives, their interplay clearly mirrors our complex social, economic, and technological reality. The primary objective of Primakov’s concept was to form a multipolar alliance between Russia, China, and India to balance the hegemonic influence of the US in global/international politics[7]. The question is whether or not the rising multipolar order can provide security and welfare for the international community? They are the driving actors of the multipolar global order.
Kortunov is correct in his verdict that “a permanently growing number of independent variables” make the evolution of a stable and balanced system of multipolarity nearly impossible. However, Cooperative multipolarity may also be accomplished (it will not lead to a more stable, cooperative world itself) through the three pillars namely, sustainable development, human rights and security. Such as the universally applicable 2030 Agenda for sustainable development, Universal Periodic Review of the Human Rights Council created ten years ago and for the peace and security realm, there is considerable room for improvement[8].
We need a networked multilateralism, which features today close cooperation of the United Nations with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), regional development banks and other entities such as the World Trade Organization, and with regional bodies such as the African Union, the European Union, the Arab League, the Organization of American States and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
What is presently becoming more apparent is that the strange tension between the classical model of international relations based on great world power competition on the one hand and a fundamentally changed global system that’s integrated and economically interdependent in historically unprecedented ways on the other. So far, the emerging strategic competition between the United States and newly rising powers has appeared to operate largely separate from the spheres of multilateral governance and economic globalization[9].
Multi polarity might well be an element of equilibrium, however; it is not a guarantee of peace and security. Europe was multipolar before the First World War, but in the absence of robust multilateral mechanisms of cooperation and governance, we had not one but two world wars, starting in Europe[10]. Globalization went beyond markets: the number of international and non-governmental organizations has grown rapidly over the past three decades.
The most important systemic risk we face today is global climatic change. The very fact is proving worse than scientists had foreseen/ predicted. Global climatic change is running faster than we are – and political will, unfortunately, be slowing down. Another important test of our cooperation is migration and therefore, the uncoordinated movement of people/individuals. Multilateralism is struggling under pressure from the expansion in populist and nationalist voices.
If states, particularly great powers, perceive their interests to be vulnerable or tough to pursue at the global level, they will naturally seek to capitalize on regional spheres of influence. This is often very true in a multipolar systemic structure, as there are more competing powers and alliances become even additional necessary. Powers within the emerging world order still continue to demonstrate the strategic advantage of multilateralism and therefore, the growth in both the number and importance of regional institutions is perhaps going to continue as multipolarity emerges[11].
CONCLUSION
In sum, one ought to be reminded that shifts within the international system of states in the global order hardly occurred within an evolutionary process. Instead, looking back/reflection, such changes in 1815 (Congress of Vienna), 1919 (Treaty of Versailles), and after 1945 (Yalta and Potsdam) were the results of war and revolution. Multilateral relations boomed, aroused by the speedy technological penetration of nearly all scientific, economic, and cultural sectors of states and societies on a global scale.
The 21st century has come to illustrate the limitations/restrictions of the utilization of force to confront new challenges exposed by violent extremism/political orientation conducive to terrorism, opening opportunities for cooperation on prevention. As a result, we are now confronted with a strange asymmetry: whereas the technology-driven processes of globalization are interconnecting societies and making networks of mutual interdependence/reciprocity altogether in all sectors of life, the adaption of political order to such revolutionary changes lags behind.
[1] https://www.kas.de/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=70842e8a-563c-5e7b-2388-b02432d1561e&groupId=288143
[2] Weyland Kurt. 2001. “Clarifying a Contested Concept: Populism in the Study of Latin American Politics.” Comparative Politics 34(1): 1–22.
[3] https://www.e-ir.info/2013/06/03/towards-a-multi-polar-international-system-which-prospects-for-global-peace/#_ftn1
[4] Robert W. Murray, “Realist Multilateralism: Cooperation in the Emerging Multipolar System,” in Seeking Order in Anarchy, ed. Robert W. Murray (Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 2016), 99.
[5] See the following works of the John Gerard Ruggie: “Unravelling the World Order: The United States and the Future of Multilateralism,” mimeograph, University of California, San Diego, 1989; and “Multilateralism: The Anatomy of an Institution,” in the issue of 10.
[6] https://www.britannica.com/topic/multilateralism
[7] https://doc-research.org/2019/12/multipolarity-and-multilateralism/
[8] https://risingpowersproject.com/quarterly/world-ready-cooperative-multipolarity/
[9] http://cris.unu.edu/sites/cris.unu.edu/files/WP%2032_GREEN_van%20Hooft.pdf
[10] https://www.un.org/press/en/2019/sgsm19468.doc.htm
[11] https://www.kas.de/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=70842e8a-563c-5e7b-2388-b02432d1561e&groupId=288143
This Article is Authored by Shruthi.U, 4th Year B.A.L.L.B (Hons) Student at Sastra Deemed to be University, Tanjore.
Also Read – History And Development Of International Humanitarian Law
