The decline of multilateralism is not necessarily final

It was an observation ultimately marked by a traditional 'realism' - which saw the prominence of sovereign states, but which also recognised that national goals could only be better achieved through global collaboration, laying the foundations for institutions that have sustained decades of economic recovery and peace.

Historically, multilateralism has taken different forms-such as the two 'Concerts of Europe' during the 19th century or, for instance, the creation of the League of Nations in the aftermath of the Great War-but it has often proved fragile. Its emergence in its most accomplished form, the one that has accompanied the great process of global integration over the past eighty years, has required the presence of a hegemon willing to enforce the rules. In the absence of such leadership, multilateral institutions inevitably tend to weaken under geopolitical pressure.

The post-Cold War unipolar moment, led by the US, saw the expansion of liberal multilateralism according to the so-called 'Washington Consensus'. A phase that, we must remember, also often identified American interests with global ones, raising doubts about fairness and representation.

Today, multilateralism faces new challenges. Emerging powers such as China use multilateral platforms to strengthen their influence, while the US shows an at least ambiguous attitude towards a position of global leadership. This weakening of hegemonic will and acceptance undermines the stability of the system. The World Trade Organisation, for example, is severely weakened by trade disputes and nationalist drives.

Multipolarity, on the other hand-defined by the presence of multiple competing powers-tends to generate instability. States inevitably act aggressively, reducing the incentives for cooperation. Historical examples, such as Germany's challenge to the Concert of Europe or the failure of the League of Nations, show how multipolar competition and the absence of hegemonic enforcement almost inevitably lead to dramatic institutional collapses.

Certain historical conditions thus favour effective multilateralism: the trauma following a major conflict; the presence of a role-conscious, recognised hegemon.

Currently, at least three of these conditions are in question. Although the US remains the dominant power, its willingness to exercise a hegemonic role and global acceptance of this condition are declining. The risk is a drift towards an unstable multipolarity, where transactional politics and power struggles replace cooperative governance.

In sum, multilateralism has historically thrived under hegemonic stability and shared objectives. Its current decline is not unprecedented-but history also shows that it can be reborn. The challenge is to prevent the necessary catalyst from being yet another devastating hegemonic conflict.

Bocconi University