Theme

Diplomacy

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: Multilateralism remains the best option, but the rules have changed

Monday Commentary: Multilateralism remains the best option, but the rules have changed

To listen to world leaders speaking these days, one would think that the world has embraced multilateralism, as the guiding principle in international relations. From Brussels to Beijing the concept is lauded, often to distinguish countries or groups of countries from Trumpian America, which has turned multilateralism into a bogey, and often a punching bag. But a closer look indicates that many countries are talking at cross-purposes.  A t one end you have the European Union, itself a quint-essential multilateralist project grouping 27  member states, some of who had spend the last century fighting each other. At  the other extreme there is China, a country with great ambitions, and a  great  discourse that accompanies these ambitions, who however presents itself as the self-proclaimed leader of the global south. Put simply, multilateralism is when a group of countries agree to pursue a common goal in co-operation, and based on equality. On the European continent multilateralism was for fifty years the way the continent conducted business, and two organisations became a clear expression of this multilateralist path: the European Union (EU), and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). They both operate by consensus. Beyond the continent, on a global level the UN is in crisis. It will take a lot of time, effort, and money, to fix it. Three countries can help, or they can make matters worse: US, Russia, and China. Trumpian America does not like the UN and has turned its back on multilateralism. The shameful US national security strategy creates a wedge between the US and Europe, and sets a narrow vision of the world. Trump described the document as a "roadmap" to ensure the US remains "the greatest and most successful nation in human history". Russia is today in no position to counterbalance the US position, even if it wants to. So, its role in the future world order will be one of an opportunistic spoiler. China is another matter. It has ambition to be a superpower and global player. It has good connections with the global south, although its claim of leadership is often overstated, and it pays lip service to multilateralism. It needs to be engaged, but with caution. Attempts at multilateral initiatives in the South, for example BRICS, are increasingly dysfunctional. Yet, multilateralism remains the best option for addressing the future. Some of the world problems, such as climate change, simply cannot be tackled by one country, or one country working alone. But most of the institutions are greatly in need of an overhaul. The European Union must take the lead. It must also engage with China on a case by case, topic by topic basis. This will be a long and laborious process. But the rules of the game, and the assumptions that underpinned them, have changed, or at best are being challenged. It is time for a global rethink. (click the image to read the full Monday Commentary).

Filter archive

Publication date
Editor's choice
News
Blinken and Lavrov discuss growing tensions Ukraine-Russia

Blinken and Lavrov discuss growing tensions Ukraine-Russia

During the talks, Blinken reiterated the US position that a Russian invasion of Ukraine would be quickly answered, including with tough sanctions against Moscow. "The best way to avert the crisis is through diplomatic means and that is what I hope to discuss with Sergei", Blinken said ahead of the conversation.
Editor's choice
News
"Trio countries" push for closer relations with EU

"Trio countries" push for closer relations with EU

At a meeting with EU Council president, Charles Michel, the prime ministers of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine reaffirmed their common position that the forthcoming Eastern Partnership summit should offer the partner states new opportunities on the path toward further EU integration based on the differentiation and more for more principles. The parties also discussed the priorities and directions important in terms of deeper cooperation between the three countries and the EU.
Editor's choice
Opinion
Opinion: After the Sochi summit, a qualitatively different stage in  Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations

Opinion: After the Sochi summit, a qualitatively different stage in Armenia-Azerbaijan negotiations

The trilateral meeting between the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia, held in Sochi on 26 November, "was a constructive stage in the post-war peace process in the region and has opened up new prospects for peace and reconciliation between Armenia and Azerbaijan", says Vasif Huseynov in this op-ed.
Editor's choice
Opinion
Opinion: Brussels should develop a customised platform to take forward a trialogue with Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Opinion: Brussels should develop a customised platform to take forward a trialogue with Armenia and Azerbaijan.

"In their active search of new approaches and strategies, European officials should keep in mind that antagonizing Russia would result in unexpected developments in the region. Instead, stabilization of the situation requires cooperation with Moscow", writes Alexander Petrosyan in this op-ed
Editor's choice
News
Joint statement by the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia hails the start of a new era of good-neighbourly relations in the South Caucasus

Joint statement by the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia hails the start of a new era of good-neighbourly relations in the South Caucasus

The long awaited meeting of the three leaders came after more than one year since the end of the 44 day Karabakh war, during which the process to bring peace and stability to the South Caucasus appeared to be faltering. The Sochi meeting has been hailed by the three countries participating in it as a success, and as a start of a new chapter in relations.
Editor's choice
Opinion
Two leaders; two meetings; two intermediaries

Two leaders; two meetings; two intermediaries

Sochi and Brussels will be two different meetings and they need to be approached differently by all sides. The EU should not try to replicate Sochi in Brussels. That would be both disingenuous and unachievable. But with some astute diplomacy and a measure of goodwill from all sides, the Brussels meeting can also be meaningful, and can in the long term end up being even more significant for the future peace and prosperity of the South Caucasus.