The current state of global affairs is largely unacceptable. Sky high energy prices, runaway inflation, choked supply chains, military conflicts, the climate crisis, pandemics and health emergencies, trade tensions and a host of other concerns have the world on edge. That the risk of a major military confrontation between two or more of the major powers is no longer unimaginable is also extremely worrying. Ultimately, where all these challenges lead is far from certain.

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) assesses that the world seems destined to grow more competitive, congested, and contested in the coming years. Much of this competition, congestion and contestation would likely revolve around the world’s major economic and military powers. Meanwhile, the smaller and less powerful countries are likely to reside on the periphery and fall victims to the whims and fancies of the bigger and more powerful states.

Already, many of the issues of concern to smaller and less powerful countries are being deprioritised on the global agenda. For example, notwithstanding pledges to the contrary, rich countries are increasingly failing to meet their climate goals to reduce green house gases. It is also instructive that the fight against climate change is one of the casualties of China’s angst towards the United States (US) over House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recent visit to Taiwan.

As part of a range of measures in response to Pelosi’s trip, China has suspended cooperation with America in the fight against climate change. Eventually, if the world’s two largest emitters of greenhouse gases do not cooperate, it is the small island developing states on the front line of the climate crisis that will be most severely affected.

Rising and revisionist powers are also increasingly pushing back against the current system which they see as too heavily bent in the direction of the US and the West. In some ways, China’s growing assertiveness in its own backyard is an attempt to challenge the status quo.
Russia’s attempts to re-engineer a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe also follow this logic.

According to Philip Zelikow, Professor of History at the University of Virginia and a former US diplomat, “The old system has fractured and must be remade.” However, the CFR warns that “Any effort to shape a new international order that is stable, inclusive, and beneficial to all must be a collaborative undertaking.”

This idea of a collaborative undertaking to shape a new international order is appealing because it suggests that all countries – the large, small, powerful and powerless, should have a seat at the table.

As a student of International Relations many years ago, I recall that reform of the United Nations (UN) was very topical among scholars and global policy makers. It is apparent that meaningful reform of the UN remains elusive. This is as good a place to start as any in terms of remaking the international system. To bring about a greater sense of fairness in how this global body functions, the Security Council needs a major rethink. Two options are to expand it to allow for greater geographical representation, including with respect to countries at different levels of development having a permanent place on the Council. The other alternative, especially if expansion fails, would be a decision on whether it is worth keeping the Security Council in its current form.

The global financial architecture also needs to be revisited. There is no lower hanging fruit than the issue of leadership of both the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. The decades-long practice of appointing European and American nationals to head these bodies needs to end.

There are also other issues that need to be addressed within the global financial architecture, such as loan conditions, especially for developing countries, as well as how decisions are made.

Gone are the days when a few countries, notwithstanding their economic might, should have the greatest say in the decision-making process.
There is much work to do to reshape the international order. Smaller and less powerful countries should see themselves as an important part of this process and not shy away from making their voices heard.