In this sixth episode, historian Thomas Gidney talks about recent and ongoing conflicts - such as Israel–Palestine, Syria’s civil war, or the Thailand–Cambodia border dispute - illustrate the reduced effectiveness of multilateral frameworks in resolving disputes.

Many of these are small-scale but persistent outbreaks rather than large wars, yet they still fall outside strong multilateral engagement. This resembles the 19th-century pattern of bilateral disputes over territory and sovereignty, where “plans” and claims overlap without an impartial, universally respected arbiter.

While the United Nations was designed to embody universality, it began without every state as a member. Even today, many conflicts are effectively between two states, and the UN can only intervene if both parties accept its legitimacy. This exposes the gap between quantitative membership (nearly every country is inside) and qualitative effectiveness (the actual capacity to resolve disputes).

The US Disengagement and Institutional Paralysis

The limitations of multilateralism have been sharpened by US policy shifts : World Trade Organization (WTO). The US has blocked the appointment of judges to the WTO Appellate Body, effectively freezing its dispute settlement system. Without this judicial function, countries have increasingly sought bilateral or regional trade deals as workarounds, bypassing the multilateral framework. United Nations agencies: The US has withdrawn or reduced participation in various commissions and agencies. In the 1970s, it left UNESCO after the organization recognized Palestine — a precedent showing how political disagreements can override multilateral engagement.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), founded in December 1949, provides essential services to Palestinian refugees in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Several donor states have reduced or suspended contributions following allegations of Hamas militants operating within the agency. This shows how the politicization of aid agencies undermines multilateral funding commitments, as national governments increasingly use contributions as leverage in political disputes.

The weakening of multilateralism is accompanied by growing skepticism from member states. For financial questions : why should a country pay large annual contributions to organizations whose projects often fail or stall ? Shifts in budget priorities: The UK, for example, has redirected portions of its aid budget toward military spending; Switzerland has made similar moves. About failure to deliver results, the high-profile cases of stalled peacekeeping missions, development projects, or climate funds reinforce the perception of ineffectiveness.

A Changing Power Balance: The Rise of China

China’s GDP is now comparable to that of the US, creating a dual power center within the global economy. Yet most armed conflicts remain bilateral in nature, rather than being truly global confrontations. This limits the incentive for great powers to empower multilateral institutions, since their interests can often be pursued more directly through bilateral influence. The decline in US engagement, particularly in dispute resolution (WTO) and UN agency leadership, has created a vacuum in the global system. States are increasingly turning to ad hoc alliances, bilateral negotiations, and regional organizations.

Interview by David Glaser 

Photo of an UNRWA intervention in Gaza in 2025, courtesy of Al Jazeera 

Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.