It seems that, despite its proud past, multilateralism is in retreat. Most agree on its necessity for managing global public goods or harms. For example, ensuring the security of commercial shipping from piracy is a widespread need that remains largely unaddressed. This ideally requires multilateral management: states coordinate patrols, negotiate equitable burden-sharing, and operate under a multilateral framework. Yet reaching such arrangements is rarely straightforward.
The South China Sea exemplifies this tension. As one of the world's busiest shipping corridors, its management should fall under multilateral cooperation. Instead, competing territorial claims among littoral states—particularly China and its Southeast Asian neighbors—combined with the involvement of non-littoral powers such as Japan, South Korea, and the United States, have hindered collective action on piracy.
China's rejection of other countries' naval patrols, along with accusations of its diversion of anti-piracy patrols for coercive purposes, has weakened anti-piracy efforts. Counter-accusations by other states deepen mistrust, leaving cooperative security arrangements elusive.
The example of the South China Sea pinpoints the problem: the post-Cold War emergence of multiple regional power centers. Negotiations serve not only to address collective goods but also increasingly to secure geopolitical advantage, often undermining cooperative outcomes.
Multilateralism has always been of great potential value, but in today's geopolitical world, its effectiveness has been compromised.
