GEU Podcast: Is multilateralism in crisis? – with Stephanie Liechtenstein

"It's the only way you can negotiate and achieve a certain type of agreement even if it is very long and very painstaking at times. I think it's still the only way to do it."

[The podcast is also available on all of the usual channels, including Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Google Podcasts]

The new buzz word in international diplomacy is multilateralism, or to put it simply, countries working together towards a common goal. This is a concept nowhere embraced so firmly as in the Brussels corridors of power, where EU leaders speak of it with the fervour of a religious belief.

But does multilateralism really work? Or does the old diplomatic maxim that “countries do not have friends, just interests” reflect more the reality of how international relations are conducted.

In many ways the European Union sees itself as a model of multilateral co-operation: 27 member states pooling their resources, and to some extent their sovereignty, to achieve common goals. It also sees itself as the standard bearer of multilateralism in the world – exerting influence through building common platforms based on its values. In recent weeks EU leaders from Ursula von der Leyen to Charles Michel in the European institutions, to Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron from among the member states, have hammered in the need for multilateralism to tackle the big challenges facing the world: from climate change to COVID-19, from refugee crises to resource shortages. Multilateralism not only requires countries to work together: it also requires them to develop rules of how to do so and then to respect those rules.

For a while, under Donald Trump it appeared that the United States had ditched multilateralism, opting instead for an America first approach. President Joe Biden has in his first days in office already gone a long way to reverse this. But is the transatlantic relationship enough for multilateralism to be the norm in the way international relations are conducted. How about Russia and China, who also pay lip service to multilateralism, but who quickly explain that they understand that to mean a multipolar world, where of course they see themselves as one of the poles? And how about everyone else?

In this episode of Global Europe Unpacked, I speak to Stephanie Liechtenstein, the Web Editor-in-Chief of the Security and Human Rights Monitor, about, amongst other things:

  • whether multilateralism is in crisis and what this means;

  • what climate change and COVID-19 mean for multilateral diplomacy;

  • whether multilateralism is being misconstrued by certain actors, such as China, and what can be done about it;

  • what can be done when countries don’t follow the rules they have committed to;

  • the biggest challenges for the 2021 Swedish Chairpersonship of the OSCE; and

  • what the EU can do to strengthen multilateral diplomacy.

It will also be broadcast on Radio GIPA FM 94.3 in Tbilisi, Georgia, on Thursday 18 February at 16:00 local time (13:00CET).

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Borrell tells the European Parliament that the situation in Afghanistan was critical, but the EU will remain engaged

Borrell tells the European Parliament that the situation in Afghanistan was critical, but the EU will remain engaged

Borrell underlined that the European Union will make every effort to support the peace process and to remain a committed partner to the Afghan people. "Of course, we will have to take into account the evolving situation, but disengagement is not an option.  We are clear on that: there is no alternative to a negotiated political settlement, through inclusive peace talks.
Editor's choice
News
Armenia and Azerbaijan edge closer to a peace deal

Armenia and Azerbaijan edge closer to a peace deal

Armenia and Azerbaijan last week announced they had agreed on the process of demarcation of their border in the Tavush region that will result in the return of four villages that had been under Armenian control since the conflict in the 1990s to Azerbaijan. The agreement is being seen as a milestone event that will greatly contribute to finalising the process leading towards the signing of a peace agreement between the two countries, who have been in conflict for more than three decades. The agreement comes after months of negotiations, and controversy, including some opposition from Armenian residents in the proximity of the four villages. On 19 April, it was announced that the eighth meeting of the Committee on Demarcation and Border Security of the State Border between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan and the State Committee on the Demarcation of the State Border between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Armenia was held under the chairmanship of Armenian Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan and Azerbaijani Deputy Prime Minister Shahin Mustafaev. There are of course many small details that will have to be ironed out later, but the fact that the sides have agreed the basic parameters, and especially their re-affirmation that they will "be guided by Alma Ata's 1991 Declaration in the demarcation process" is a huge step forward. No wonder that the international community in the last few days have lined up to congratulate the two sides on their success and to nudge them forward to complete the process of signing a peace agreement between them. Seasoned observers now see the signing of such an agreement as being truly within reach. Of course, there will be those who for one reason or another will not like these developments and will try to spoil the process. Armenia and Azerbaijan must remain focused on overcoming any last obstacles, and on its part, the international community must also remain focused in helping them do so as a priority.

Popular

Editor's choice
News
Armenia and Azerbaijan edge closer to a peace deal

Armenia and Azerbaijan edge closer to a peace deal

Armenia and Azerbaijan last week announced they had agreed on the process of demarcation of their border in the Tavush region that will result in the return of four villages that had been under Armenian control since the conflict in the 1990s to Azerbaijan. The agreement is being seen as a milestone event that will greatly contribute to finalising the process leading towards the signing of a peace agreement between the two countries, who have been in conflict for more than three decades. The agreement comes after months of negotiations, and controversy, including some opposition from Armenian residents in the proximity of the four villages. On 19 April, it was announced that the eighth meeting of the Committee on Demarcation and Border Security of the State Border between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan and the State Committee on the Demarcation of the State Border between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Armenia was held under the chairmanship of Armenian Deputy Prime Minister Mher Grigoryan and Azerbaijani Deputy Prime Minister Shahin Mustafaev. There are of course many small details that will have to be ironed out later, but the fact that the sides have agreed the basic parameters, and especially their re-affirmation that they will "be guided by Alma Ata's 1991 Declaration in the demarcation process" is a huge step forward. No wonder that the international community in the last few days have lined up to congratulate the two sides on their success and to nudge them forward to complete the process of signing a peace agreement between them. Seasoned observers now see the signing of such an agreement as being truly within reach. Of course, there will be those who for one reason or another will not like these developments and will try to spoil the process. Armenia and Azerbaijan must remain focused on overcoming any last obstacles, and on its part, the international community must also remain focused in helping them do so as a priority.