Rethinking global cooperation in the 21st century

Image Source: Getty

 This article is a part of the essay series “Budapest Edit”

In 1951, Carl Schmitt pointed out that “for four hundred years, from the sixteenth to the twentieth centuries, the structure of European international law had been shaped by a fundamental reality: the conquest of a new world.”^[1] It is becoming increasingly clear that we need a bold new paradigm, one that is suited for an emerging multipolar global order of sovereignty and multilateral cooperation.

Legal scholars associated with the Global South emphasise that mid-20^th century attempts to establish a framework for global cooperation under the United Nations (UN) Charter often masked an unsettling truth— renewed attempts to exert dominance and establish control by historic empires and powerful groups under the new hegemony that we now call “global governance”.^[2]

In the realms of politics, legal doctrines, and international relations, we are now witnessing an escalating wave of distrust in these global governance mechanisms. The expectations concerning initiatives like the UN's Pact for the Future or the World Economic Forum’s slogan, "Rebuilding Trust", are limited at best.

True hope lies in the global resurgence of sovereignty movements often labelled conservative populism. This shift signifies a break from centralised globalisation and heralds the reaffirmation of cultural, national, and religious identities as the foundation for genuine international cooperation.

The Abraham Accords and the Declaration of Human Fraternity (with all theological reservations) exemplify this transformative bottom-up approach to building a new paradigm of cooperation grounded in identity affirmation. Yet, old ways linger and demand our critical scrutiny—for instance, the post-Cotonou Agreement, which allows the EU to extend its ideological and Western-centric influence over Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific (ACP).

Central European states—energised by their dynamic economies and shaped by memories of political dependence and the colonial policies of the Russian, Prussian, and Ottoman Empires—are uniquely positioned to serve as a vibrant bridge between the Global South and the Global West.

^[1] Carl Schmitt, Der Nomos der Erde im Völkerrecht des Jus Publicum Europaeum, 4th ed. (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1997), at 69.

^[2] i.a. Anthony Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, Cambridge University Press 2005; B. S. Chimni, Third World Approaches to International Law: A Manifesto, International Community Law Review 8, 2006; Sundhya Pahuja, Decolonising International Law: Development, Economic Growth and the Politics of Universality, Cambridge University Press 2013.

• International Affairs
• The Pacific, East and Southeast Asia
• Abraham Accords
• central european states
• Declaration of Human Fraternity
• Global South
• Global South Countries
• un pact for the future

The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

PREV NEXT