BRUSSELS, Belgium, Feb 13 (IPS) – The latest World Economic Forum has highlighted the current crisis of multilateralism. More than sixty heads of state and eight hundred business leaders gathered in Davos under the theme ‘Spirit of Dialogue’, aimed at strengthening global cooperation, but this was preceded by a series of events that pointed to a further unraveling of the international system.
On January 3, Donald Trump launched a illegal military attack on Venezuela to kidnap President Nicolás Maduro, which was widely condemned as a violation of international law. On January 7, he signed one executive order the withdrawal of the US from 66 international bodies and processes, including 31 UN entities, such as the UN Democracy Fund, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and UN Women. Then came the launch of Trump’s Peace Council, apparently an attempt to replace the UN Security Council. The country that helped build the multilateral system is walking away from the parts it doesn’t like and trying to reshape the rest in its own interests.
Trump’s approach to multilateralism is purely transactional. His government only interferes in international processes if they advance direct American interests and withdraws from processes that impose obligations. This decouples multilateralism from its core principles: responsibility for shared norms, equality between nations and universality. It encourages other states to follow suit.
This approach has devastating financial consequences. U.S. threats to discourage international institutions have left institutions in disarray. The UN’s development, human rights, and peacekeeping programs all relied heavily on US financial contributions. The World Health Organization is facing shortcomings that threaten its ability to respond to health emergencies because the US government has resigned without paying its dues.
The US’s closest allies are not safe. Trump threatened NATO member Denmark with 25 percent tariffs unless the country agreed to those of the US purchase of Greenland, and suggested that he might conquer the area by force. NATO’s Article 5 on collective defense – invoked only once by the US after September 11 – is under discussion. European states respond by seeking strategic autonomy, cutting development aid and reducing UN contributions finding additional billions for military expenditure.
Problematic alternatives try to profit from the crisis. In Davos, China positioned itself as the mature alternative to Trump and promoted his country Friends of Global Governance initiativea group of 43 predominantly authoritarian states, including Belarus, Nicaragua and North Korea.
The line of government leaders meeting Chinese leader Xi Jinping shows that many states are turning in this direction. But this comes at a cost: China’s vision of international cooperation puts state sovereignty first and leaves no room for international monitoring of human rights or cooperation to promote democratic freedoms.
The same story applies to the new Council of Peace. The body emerged from a controversial November 2025 Security Council meeting solution establishing external governance for Gaza, but Trump clearly envisions a permanent, broader role for Gaza. He chairs the meeting in a personal capacity, with full authority to veto decisions, draw up agendas and invite or dismiss members. Permanent membership costs $1 billion, with the destination of the money unclear.
That of the board draft charter makes no mention of the protection of human rights, makes no provision for civil society participation and does not establish accountability mechanisms. Most of the members so far are autocratic states such as Belarus, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The country’s credibility is further undermined by the fact that Israel has just joined despite making a mockery of international humanitarian law. More democratic states have declined invitations, mainly due to concerns about the body’s unclear relationship with the UN. Trump’s response was to threaten higher tariffs against France and withdraw Canada’s invitation. He has made it clear that he considers himself above international law and is positioning himself as a de facto world president who can resolve conflicts through personal power and pressure.
As the old order crumbles, civil society must play a crucial role in determining what comes next. While the UN – and especially the Security Council, paralyzed through the use of veto power by China, Russia and the US – in need of reform, it remains the only global framework built on formal equality and universal human rights. As the UN faces attacks from those who abandon the UN or seek to dilute its human rights mandate, civil society must mobilize to keep the UN anchored to its founding principles and challenge the hierarchies that exclude voices from the global South.
It is the job of civil society to organize across borders to enforce international law, document violations of international humanitarian and human rights law, and demand accountability. Not for the first time, civil society must win the argument that may not be right.
Samuel King is a researcher on the Horizon Europe funded research project ASSURED: Shaping collaboration for a world in transition at CIVICUS: Global Alliance for Citizen Participation.
For interviews or more information, please contact [email protected]
© Inter Press Service (20260213192214) — All rights reserved. Original source: Inter Press Service
#Multilateralism #reaches #breaking #point