Civil Society Must Step Up: The Multilateralism Crisis as a Catalyst for Change

The European Union stands as one of the most ambitious regional integration projects in modern history. It has delivered decades of stability and prosperity through cooperation, enshrined high standards in civil liberties, environmental and consumer protections, invested billions in cultural exchange and social programs, and symbolizes unity with a shared flag and anthem — all within democratic structures.

Yet, this achievement is constantly under contestation. Public skepticism persists, and one of its most influential members has withdrawn, experiencing profound political and economic consequences. The EU remains internationally recognized as a benchmark for regional cooperation, but it continues to struggle with public support at home.

This paradox reflects a broader global trend: international multilateralism, like European integration, has generated frameworks for peace, progress, and collective problem-solving. But it now faces mounting challenges from nationalist narratives, political instrumentalization, and a retreat from cooperative approaches.

International cooperation is most under strain at the very moment it is most needed. Climate change, widening inequality, biodiversity loss, artificial intelligence governance, and pandemic preparedness are challenges that no state can address alone. Yet multilateral institutions often appear constrained by institutional inertia and structural asymmetries.

A core obstacle lies in the reluctance to modernize institutions designed in the aftermath of World War II. The UN system, for instance, continues to be hampered by the use of veto power in the Security Council and by insufficient inclusion of the Global South as an equal partner. The absence of reform is undermining legitimacy and effectiveness.

At the same time, the United States’ role as guarantor of the multilateral order has become more inconsistent and politically contested. This has created a vacuum that cannot be sustainably filled by unilateralism. What is needed instead is a coalition of states willing to advance common rules and shared responsibility. Otherwise, the risk grows of cascading humanitarian crises and deeper fragmentation in global governance.

Still, the crisis of multilateralism is not irreversible. It can also serve as a catalyst for innovation — for new alliances, new institutional formats, and new actors. Regional partnerships and so-called “middle powers” have a particular opportunity to lead.

If global power balances are shifting, then approaches to cooperation must also evolve. A more distributed system, in which small and mid-sized countries assume collective responsibility, is both possible and necessary.

If this transition fails, the alternative is a patchwork of ad-hoc deals driven by short-term domestic agendas rather than long-term global vision. That would mean the erosion of the rules-based order and the normalization of power politics as the sole source of legitimacy.

Where, then, can momentum be generated? At a time when multilateralism is under strain, we must focus on platforms that convene the major players while remaining flexible enough to deliver results. The G20 — which brings together advanced and emerging economies — and the BRICS grouping are two such platforms. Neither is perfect, but both are indispensable.

Rather than operating in isolation, these formats could identify areas of complementarity and initiate structured dialogue on the principles of an inclusive and sustainable global order. Both have affirmed support for multilateralism, but the challenge is to move from declarations to implementation.

Key areas include governance of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, climate and biodiversity, sustainable finance, global health, and digital infrastructure. China’s recent calls for international cooperation on AI regulation illustrate both the urgency and the potential for joint action.

In this landscape, civil society plays a critical role — not only by generating ideas and policy proposals, but by building trust, demanding accountability, and ensuring that institutions remain responsive to societal needs. A recent example underscores this potential: the initiative led by Pacific Island states, supported by youth and civil society networks, successfully mobilized the United Nations General Assembly to request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on states’ climate obligations. This demonstrates how civil society can shape global norms by catalyzing political momentum and legal innovation.

The legal foundations for collective action are already in place. The UN Charter, human rights treaties, the Paris Agreement, and the Sustainable Development Goals provide a normative framework. What is needed is to translate these principles into practice, with civil society, policymakers, the private sector, and international organizations working in tandem.

Looking ahead to the 2026 G20 (under U.S. presidency) and the G7 (under French presidency), civil society engagement will be more important than ever. Despite geopolitical tensions and diverging interests, particularly on climate, an active and well-organized civil society can help sustain progress — by offering concrete proposals, fostering inclusive dialogue, and enabling cross-sector collaboration.

Working with other stakeholders in multi-stakeholder formats, civil society can help ensure that governance frameworks for technologies such as AI, and for climate, health, and the environment, truly advance the global public good.

The moment for action is now. A fairer and more resilient global order will not emerge by default; it must be deliberately built.