A Wake-Up Call: The World Cannot Afford to Burn! Rethinking Multilateralism in a Fragmented World

As someone who has spent years navigating the intersections of technology, business, and development across Africa, I find myself increasingly drawn to understanding the undercurrents of global politics and economics. My recent readings— Tim Marshall‘s trilogy on geography, “Why Nations Fail” by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson, and the timeless economic treatise “The Wealth of Nations” by Adam Smith—have deepened my perspective on the shifting revolutions and evolutions shaping our world. Reflecting on these insights, I am compelled to ask:

Are the global institutions that once championed peace, stability, and prosperity still relevant in today’s rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape?

Tim Marshall’s works provide a stark reminder that geography remains a powerful determinant of nations’ fortunes. From “The Power of Geography” to “Prisoners of Geography,” we see how mountains, rivers, and coastlines shape not just borders but also politics, culture, and economies. Consider the entrenched conflicts in regions like Gaza, Sudan, or the complexities of the European-Russian relationship. The geographical constraints and strategic locations of these areas mean that conflicts here are more than just political—they are embedded in the very landscape, making the crises enduring and deeply rooted.

These geographical realities challenge the effectiveness of multilateral institutions like the UN (United Nations). While geography remains unchanged, global politics have become more complex. States are not just dealing with rival nations but also with transnational issues like climate change, cyber threats, and economic instability.

The old models of diplomacy, which often relied on static understandings of nations’ interests, struggle to keep up with the dynamic and interconnected world we now inhabit.

In “The Future of Geography,” Marshall highlights how new spaces, like cyberspace, are becoming the next battlegrounds, beyond the physical terrain. This shift calls into question the relevance of traditional institutions built in the mid-20th century.

Organizations like the UN, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), and the Bretton Woods institutions were designed in the aftermath of World War II to address the threats of that era—primarily state-centric conflicts. Today, they are facing pressures from a world where power is diffused, where non-state actors can wield significant influence, and where economic and security threats are often asymmetrical.

(read more about the: NATO, Bretton Woods System)

“Why Nations Fail” offers a critical lens here. Acemoglu and Robinson argue that inclusive political and economic institutions are essential for long-term prosperity. However, many global institutions are hamstrung by exclusivity, power imbalances, and the political agendas of their most influential members.

The UN Security Council, for example, is often paralyzed by the veto power of its permanent members, reflecting not a commitment to global peace but to national interests. As a result, crises persist, from the ongoing conflict in Gaza to the civil unrest in Sudan, while multilateral organizations are unable to act decisively.

Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations” reminds us that economic cooperation should ideally lead to mutual benefits. Yet, in practice, this cooperation is often undermined by protectionism, trade wars, and a failure to address systemic inequalities.

In the global south, particularly in Africa, we see economies that are ready to emerge but are frequently hindered by external debt, trade imbalances, and a lack of fair access to global markets. Multilateral organizations, rather than fostering a truly open global market, sometimes entrench existing disparities through unfair trade policies or inadequate responses to crises.

AID HAS BECOME A POLITICAL WEAPON TO SILENCE THE GLOBAL SOUTH WHO CONSISTENTLY AND CONSTANTLY RUN TO THE GLOBAL NORTH FOR HELP

A prime example of this is the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), a trade policy ostensibly designed to provide duty-free access to U.S. markets for African countries. Since its inception, 18 countries have at some point been delisted by the U.S., starting in 2003 with the removal of the Central African Republic and Eritrea. There are instances where a country lost and later regained its eligibility, like Madagascar, which was delisted in 2010 and reinstated in 2015.

Smith’s principle of the “invisible hand” has driven global markets for centuries, but in today’s hyper-globalized world, there is a need for more visible and deliberate hands to guide equitable growth and development. Multilateral institutions, if reformed, could provide that guiding hand, ensuring that globalization works for all and not just the few.

The world is in a state of flux, with new power dynamics emerging and old alliances being tested. The rise of China, the resurgence of Russia, the complexities of Middle Eastern politics, and the vulnerabilities exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic have all contributed to a rethinking of global governance. The world today is no longer bipolar or unipolar; it is multipolar, fluid, and often chaotic.

Marshall’s emphasis on the future battlegrounds, combined with Acemoglu and Robinson’s critique of failing states, points to the need for a reimagined multilateralism. One that:

1. Prioritizes inclusivity and equity: Global governance must move beyond the outdated model of a few powerful nations dictating terms. Regional powers and organizations should be given more autonomy to manage local crises, with support from the global community.
2. Adapts to non-state actors and new frontiers: From tech giants to climate activists, non-state actors play a significant role in shaping today’s world. Institutions must evolve to include these voices in dialogues about global governance.
3. Addresses economic disparities head-on: Drawing from Smith’s ideas, there should be a renewed emphasis on free and fair trade, coupled with mechanisms to ensure that the benefits of globalization are equitably distributed. This could mean rethinking global trade rules, debt relief for struggling nations, and more robust frameworks for sustainable development.

The crises in Gaza, Israel, Lebanon, Ukraine, Russia, Sudan, and northern Ethiopia are not isolated tragedies; they are the sparks of a fire that threatens to engulf our world.

We need to wake up to the reality that if we continue to rely on the outdated playbook of delayed diplomacy, endless dialogue, and passive protocols, we will watch the world crumble into ashes. The time for empty resolutions and reactive measures is over. Dialogue and protocols don’t save lives; decisive action does. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and other bodies cannot adjudicate when nations have already been torn apart and people’s lives have been irreparably shattered.

Leaders and institutions must rise to the occasion with agility, humanity, and a proactive mindset. We cannot wait for the next UN General Assembly or a NATO summit to address the urgency of conflicts that are claiming lives every day. We need global leaders who are willing to act swiftly, break through the bureaucratic red tape, and prioritize peace over power. It’s time for the United Nations, African Union, European Union, and other multilateral bodies to reform from within, so they can act as true enablers of peace and security, not just observers of chaos.

I call upon leaders from the United States, China, Russia, the EU, and regional powers in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia to set aside political posturing and recognize the shared responsibility to prevent a global catastrophe.

The world needs a new brand of leadership—one that sees peace and stability as the highest form of power.

We must rebuild these institutions to be agile, inclusive, and humane, capable of swift intervention to prevent wars, protect lives, and promote reconciliation. If we fail to act now, we are not just risking the collapse of nations; we are risking the future of humanity itself.

Our inaction will not be forgotten. History will judge us, and if we do not rise to this moment, it will mark this era as the time when humanity failed itself.

The choice is clear: we either act decisively now, or prepare for a world ravaged by the consequences of our collective inaction. The world is on fire, and it’s time to extinguish the flames before they consume us all.