The UN is the main institution of the post-war order formed after World War II, based on multilateralism and the balance of interests. When the organization was founded in 1945, the goal was to prevent wars, and later many other issues were added, such as global health and climate protection. Meanwhile, however, the UN, and especially the Security Council, are widely seen as in dire need of renewal.
A New World Order in Five Years or a Permanent Disarray?
Finnish President Alexander Stubb, one of the few heads of state with a doctorate in international relations, argues that there is currently a power vacuum from which a new world order will emerge in the next five years.
Other experts believe that the transition will be more protracted. “We cannot expect a short transition between a US-led order and a Chinese-led order,“ wrote Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations think tank, in the magazine “Foreign Affairs”. "For some time, the world will be left without any order," he predicts, warning of the temptation to "use a multitude of geographical, economic and technological levers as weapons of pressure."
Lack of reforms and broken rules
"The framework of multilateralism associated with the post-war period and the golden age of the UN is already history," says Teresa Nogueira Pinto, a globalization expert at the "Lusofonia" University in Lisbon. "What has been done so far no longer works. Most peacekeeping missions have failed, and it is difficult to imagine how the urgently needed reforms in the UN could be carried out." Pinto gave the example of the Security Council, which has no longer responded to the world since 2026. "But who should join? India? Pakistan? Nigeria? Ethiopia? It is difficult to even imagine what the reform should be like.“
“I do not agree that this era has passed“, says Johannes Thim of the Berlin-based “Science and Politics“ Foundation. “International law is diverse and includes many things that are not noticeable in everyday relations between states - diplomatic practices, treaties, etc. They are not noticeable because they are not so spectacular.“
However, there is no doubt that violations of international law have become more frequent in recent times - for example, through aggressive wars such as those in Ukraine and Iran. And violations of international humanitarian law, such as in Gaza, are a challenge to the multilateral order.
According to Tim, there is another factor that deprives multilateralism of stability - this is the withdrawal of the United States from dozens of international organizations and treaties, including the World Health Organization, the Paris Climate Agreement and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, as well as UNESCO. Recently, the US government has also increased its pressure on the International Criminal Court, which it constantly criticizes. "When the most powerful country acts in this way, it poses a threat to the system as a whole. I would say it is even a greater threat than if Russia, for example, were to wage an aggressive war," Tim points out.
Old alliances collapse, new ones arise
Trump is happy to invoke the "Monroe" doctrine from 1823, according to which the Western Hemisphere is a reserved zone of influence for Washington. In relation to modern times, this could mean the following: the rest of the world will no longer be dominated by America, but by other large and medium powers - that is, after the withdrawal of the United States, a multipolar world order will emerge.
For many countries, the changes carry a risk of losing influence, but for others they may be a factor for new positioning and ensuring their place in a multipolar world that is no longer dominated by the West. It is no coincidence, for example, that the BRICS is increasing its importance and accepting new members, and is demonstrating increasing self-confidence as a counterweight to the international financial architecture shaped by the West. Teresa Pinto says: “Many African countries are realizing that earlier models have not brought them advantages in terms of sustainable growth. That's why they're looking for new opportunities, and this is in sync with the return of geopolitics: for a long time we thought it was a thing of the past, but that's not the case“.
The world is also reorganizing in the security sphere. NATO is under threat of the US leaving or even launching a military strike if Trump continues to maintain his claims to Danish-ruled Greenland. In the Middle East, US allies are questioning the reliability of American promises of support and are looking for new alliances. In early August, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and nuclear-armed Pakistan formed a pact that provides guarantees similar to those of NATO. Both it and the European "Coalition of the Willing" to support Ukraine are examples of the emerging smaller and more flexible formats, which are also defined as "minilateralism".
“A world without rules benefits only the strong”, says Johannes Thiem. “All others, medium-strength or weak, are left in the background. That is why Europe, which I would classify as a middle power, has a great interest in preserving some kind of order - that is, not having a world without rules in which the stronger simply prevails.“ Along with military considerations, many countries are also looking for new, broader economic and political partnerships. Teresa Pinto expects regional alliances to gain greater importance, as they could yield better results than global mechanisms.
Whose interests will the future world order serve?
Teresa Pinto names three factors that could influence the future distribution of power in a multipolar world: sovereignty, access to resources and, last but not least, demography. “By the end of the century, India could become a superpower“, Pinto believes.
However, what kind of world order will emerge is still to be seen – whether the US will lose importance, whether the power of other countries like China will increase, whether the emphasis will be on minilateralism and regional alliances.
Johannes Thiem shares his concerns in this regard. “Violence in the world will increase. There will be more wars. Wars will become more brutal. It will become more difficult to organize cooperation at all. I don't know what would happen if another pandemic broke out or a new financial crisis. And the climate crisis is also a challenge that can only be overcome together,” he says.
Author: David El