Description
This article engages with arguments made increasingly vocally in two adjacent areas of literature: multilateralism and plurilateralism. Both agree on the problem: that the current international system of cooperation is challenged to the point of failure by geopolitical rivalry and selective manipulation. This is where discussions part. Discussions on multilateralism, supported by evidence from a range of issue areas, either suggest accommodation with or challenge to the recent onslaught against multilateralism. For some, plurilateralism is suggested to be the answer, offering the rationale that it enables aligned groups to achieve shared objectives without being hampered by unworkable situations in multilateral fora, thus rescuing in principle the current order by sidelining the bigger problem. The problem that is posed here is cooperation. The instinct for pragmatic workarounds when particular kinds of cooperation are not wanted is understandable. Yet, the article argues that this will entrench inequality and exploitative conditions that have led to the failures of multilateralism in the first place. The article draws on literature on legal heterarchy and pluralist constitutional politics to make a case for renegotiating multilateralism and staying with the challenges of navigating dissent.