Multilateralism under pressure needs smarter partnerships to save the 2030 promise

Multilateralism under pressure needs smarter partnerships to save the 2030 promise: Photo: Stephen Cook

The world’s shared project is fraying at the edges. From climate shocks to conflict spillovers and debt distress, today’s converging crises expose how much global problem-solving relies on multilateralism and global governance that function, not just exist. That is why a recent UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs policy dialogue, held this year in Bangkok, matters beyond the meeting room. It asked whether lessons from Asia Pacific institutions could help rebuild trust and coherence at a time when the very mechanics of cooperation appear to be stalling.

The architecture of cooperation is creaking

The risks are tangible. First, geopolitical fragmentation is eroding cross-border coordination precisely when it is most needed. Editorial analysis around the UN’s 80th anniversary warns of a “crisis of multilateralism rarely seen since World War II,” with shrinking cooperation and funding shortfalls undermining collective action.

Second, an institutional credibility gap is widening. Country messaging for the UN’s 80-year moment strikes an honest note: cooperation remains the organisation’s beating heart, yet it is only as strong as each state’s commitment. In other words, legitimacy now hinges on delivery.

Third, money is speaking loudly, and not in the right direction. Global military spending hit a record 2.718 trillion dollars in 2024, the steepest annual rise in decades, while aid budgets and core contributions to multilaterals are softening. That skew in public outlays tightens the squeeze on the SDG 16 and SDG 17 agenda.

What bangkok added that is new

The Bangkok dialogue sat within UN DESA’s “Global Policy Dialogue: charting new directions” series and zeroed in on pragmatic fixes, not slogans. It asked how socioeconomic experience in Asia and the Pacific can map onto global challenges, with a focus on shared solutions and on ensuring no one is left behind. Subsequent programme notes for the series underline the same ambition. The point is subtle but important: regional capability can buttress global cooperation when universal bargains are gridlocked.

Policy incoherence is the silent killer

Even when countries agree in principle, policies often pull in opposite directions. The OECD’s work on policy coherence highlights how transboundary spillovers and siloed ministries derail outcomes unless governments install whole-of-government mechanisms, strengthen evidence systems and align incentives. Without such machinery, fragmentation compounds, partnerships thin out, and the costs land on the poorest.

Five practical guardrails for a stressed system

1.     Fund the partnerships you say you want. Ring-fence predictable, multi-year financing for core multilateral functions and for regional bodies that stitch national policies together. Falling official development assistance, particularly to multilaterals and least-developed countries, is an early warning that rhetoric is outpacing resources.

2.     Bake coherence into law and budgets. Adopt and apply policy-coherence standards across cabinet processes, budget circulars and regulatory impact assessments, building on existing guidelines and indicator frameworks. Make ministers report on cross-border impacts, not just domestic outputs.

3.     Invest in regional problem-solvers. Asia-Pacific institutions, including ESCAP and university-policy networks in Bangkok and beyond, can broker technical solutions, from data interoperability to disaster finance, that scale globally when global bargains stall.

4.     Protect civic space in delivery chains. When states and multilaterals are overstretched, civil society and business step in. That substitution only helps if transparency and accountability do not erode in the process. This goes to the heart of SDG 16’s institutional promise.

5.     Rebalance security and human development spending. The record rise in military outlays is crowding fiscal space. Medium-term expenditure frameworks should set explicit guardrails so emergency defence hikes do not permanently cannibalise investments in justice, health, climate resilience and data.

Thailand and Southeast Asia, where the stakes feel local

This debate is not abstract in Bangkok. The policy dialogue convened here, alongside a region that hosts one of the densest ecosystems of UN and intergovernmental organisations, shows how regional cooperation can steady global systems during turbulence. As climate and economic shocks cascade across borders, Southeast Asian governments that lock policy coherence into their planning, and that hedge against funding volatility, will be better placed to keep national SDG commitments on track.

The bottom line

Retreat is not destiny. The mechanics of partnership can be modernised, and the evidence on coherence is available. What is missing are choices that privilege collective returns over short-term national optics. If 2025 is the year the world admits that governance is an SDG accelerator, not an afterthought, then Bangkok’s conversation will have done more than diagnose the malaise. It will have started a repair.

Further reading and resources

·       Global policy dialogue series overview and recent programme notes. (United Nations)

·       Bangkok session announcement and context from regional partners. (econ.chula.ac.th)

·       OECD on making policy coherence real in government systems. (OECD)

·       UN Thailand’s 80-year reflection on the strength of cooperation. (The United Nations in Thailand)

·       SIPRI’s latest figures on world military expenditure. (SIPRI)

Editor’s note: this commentary references SDG 16 and SDG 17 as the governance spine of the 2030 agenda.