Multilat down/fails – negotiation structure, developed countries, undeveloped countries, and sovereignty

Multilat down/fails – negotiation structure, developed countries, undeveloped countries, and sovereignty

Westphalian ultilateralism This apparently irresistible trend was not to last however. The multilateral order began to wilt with consequences that were not only evident in the areas such as trade and climate, but also in other sectors too, including those that were the most difficult for states to monitor, such as the internet (Klimburg, 2013). As a result we began to witness the emergence of what might best be described as a form of ‘Westphalian multilateralism’, a system in which ‘states asserted their national sovereignty by saying no (...) even if it was sometimes masked by agreement in general terms’ (Wade, 2011). But what caused this shift? Four factors basically: the structure of negotiations which were only becoming more complex under conditions of economic multipolarity; a fundamental reassessment by Western countries of what they actually stood to gain from the multilateral system; the increasing ability – and willingness – by developing countries’ to block a system which they believed had hitherto been heavily skewed in favour of the West; and finally, these same countries’ interpretation of the world exclusively in terms of sovereignty (Croom, 2009; Laïdi, 2012).