What Will the New World Order Look Like After the Era of Multilateralism?

In September 2025, President Donald Trump arrived at the United Nations Headquarters in New York to address the General Assembly. However, before his words could begin, the escalator in the main lobby he was riding suddenly stopped. As the speech proceeded, the teleprompter malfunctioned. Two minor disruptions, which were immediately interpreted as some kind of omen.

Trump, a former television star who knows how a show should run, responded with a half-joke before the heads of state and government: “These are the two things I get from the UN: broken escalators and teleprompters.”

The UN is a central institution in the world order formed by the United States after World War II. This institution was designed with the idea of multilateralism, meaning an order based on cooperation between nations. When established in 1945, the UN’s primary mission was to prevent the outbreak of war and maintain peace on earth. Later, that mandate was expanded into various fields: global health, development, and climate protection. However, central UN bodies, particularly the UN Security Council, are deemed obsolete and in need of renewal, much like the organisation’s headquarters on the banks of the East River.

Following Trump’s 2025 speech, the UN had to dismiss allegations that the escalator failure was intentional. It was later discovered that the disruption was caused by Trump’s own cameraman, who inadvertently activated the safety mechanism.

Behind this minor incident, a larger question arises: is Trump’s ‘America First’ politics merely a symptom of the weakening multilateral world order, or is it a factor contributing to its destruction? Politicians and analysts in various countries are now debating: has the era of multilateralism ended? If so, what order will replace it?

A New World Order or Prolonged Chaos?

As one of the few heads of state to hold a doctorate in international relations, Finnish President Alexander Stubb argues that the world is currently in a power vacuum. According to him, a new world order will emerge from this void within the next five per cent years.

Other experts predict that the realignment will take longer. “This moment is not merely a brief transition period between a US-led order and a China-led order,” wrote Mark Leonard, director of the think tank European Council on Foreign Relations, in a recent article in Foreign Affairs magazine. “For the time being, the world will be without any order.” Leonard warned of the “temptation to use various economic, technological, and geographical pressure points as weapons.”

Stagnation of Reform

“The post-war multilateral framework and the golden age of the UN are in the past,” said Teresa Nogueira Pinto, a globalisation expert focusing on Africa at Universidade de Lusofonia, Lisbon. “The system is no longer functioning. Most peacekeeping missions have failed, and it is difficult to imagine how urgent UN reforms can be realised.” In an interview with DW, Pinto cited the Security Council, which she believes no longer reflects the geopolitical reality of 2026. “But who should join? India? Pakistan? Nigeria? Ethiopia? Even imagining its reform is very difficult.”

“I do not agree with the assumption that this era has completely ended,” said Johannes Thimm, head of the US research group at Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik based in Berlin. “International law is very diverse and covers many things we do not realise in everyday relations between states, such as diplomatic customs, treaties, and so on. And much of it persists because it is not particularly spectacular.”

However, there is no doubt that violations of international law have increased recently—for example, wars of aggression such as in Ukraine and Iran. Violations of international humanitarian law, as seen in Gaza, are also eroding the multilateral order.

Thimm cited the United States’ withdrawal from dozens of international organisations and treaties as another factor eroding the stability of multilateralism. These include the World Health Organisation, the Paris Climate Agreement and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, as well as the cultural organisation UNESCO. Recently, the US government has once again hardened its stance against the International Criminal Court, which it has long criticised. “If the country that remains the greatest power acts like this,” said Thimm, “then it endangers the system as a whole. I would even say the impact is greater than if, for example, Russia launched a war of aggression.”

Old Alliances Cracking, New Ones Emerging

Trump frequently refers to the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, which limited the exclusive influence of the United States in the Western Hemisphere. If applied today, this means the world outside that region would no longer be dominated by America, but by other major and middle powers—a multipolar world order after the United as States vacates its position as a primary player.

For many countries that benefit from the old system, this change brings the risk of receding influence and prosperity. However, for other nations, this change could serve as momentum to secure their position within a multipolar world that is no longer dominated by the West.

It is no coincidence that the BRICS alliance is becoming increasingly important and continues to expand. The group, comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, is becoming more confident in crafting an alternative blueprint for the Western-formed global financial architecture, known as the Bretton Woods system.

Teresa Pinto stated, “Many African nations realise that previous models were not so beneficial to them in terms of sustainable growth. Therefore, they are seizing the opportunity. This goes hand in hand with the return of geopolitics. Previously, we believed for a long time…”