By Prof Datuk Dr Faiz Abdullah

It is said that meetings are indispensable when you don’t want to do anything but, cynicism aside, does that apply to summits? The last time Malaysia was invited to attend the G20 summit was nearly a decade ago, in 2015, when echoes began reverberating about things falling apart but that was generally dismissed as the whining of grouchy doomsday prophets. The forebodings were given short shrift and nothing was done. Fast forward to the 2024 G20 Summit in Rio de Janeiro, and the world’s foremost economic powerhouses are now forced to confront that reality, with multilateralism and globalisation indeed coming apart at the seams. Not entirely broken but badly battered and bruised.

Economic and geopolitical divides have widened into chasms – and trade uncertainty has reached once-unthinkable levels. And through it all, multilateral institutions have been incapable of bridging these yawning gaps. In response, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s interventions in the first two sessions of the Summit carried a clear and stern message, articulated in language that could best be described as the “spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings”, demonstrating his holy anger at the gross injustice perpetrated against the weaker and marginalised nations and communities, and the blatant bigotry and duplicity of the Global North vis-à-vis the Global South.

In calling out the global powers that be for their indifference and hypocrisy on global governance, Anwar underscored that this has led to the institutions failing, and these failures perpetuate the very inequalities and oppression they were designed to alleviate and avert. Cut the crap and walk the talk, that’s what the Prime Minister is saying effectively, a mantra that I believe should be in Anwar’s active vocabulary especially when being interviewed by the wolf-in-sheepskin-press.

Inability to meet emerging challenges

While the vacillations of global geopolitics may be unpredictable, without urgent and decisive reform of global governance structures, the many and monstrous woes facing the world will surely only grow more dire, and the powers that be are the main offenders and culprits! Designed in the post-war era, the architects of the Bretton Woods system and its associated trade and political frameworks intended them to stabilise economies, foster shared prosperity and prevent conflict. Yet, what is increasingly apparent today is their inability – or unwillingness – to adapt to a shifting, multipolar world and meet emerging challenges.

Likewise, the World Trade Organisation, the supposed arbiter of a fair and transparent rules-based trading system, has spent decades slow walking into irrelevance. Creaking, legacy structures disproportionately empower a handful of powerful nations, while the paralysis of its Appellate Body since 2019 has rendered dispute resolution impotent. Its other two functions, that of negotiation and trade policy monitoring, are also up against a wall. Without these functional mechanisms, WTO protocols and trade rules have been increasingly weaponised as instruments of geopolitical strategy, with major powers leveraging tariffs and trade remedies to protect domestic interests, eroding the multilateral principles that lie at the core of the WTO's mandate.

The dysfunctionality extends to global political institutions too, most notably the United Nations Security Council. Without holding back in his intervention, Anwar chastised the permanent members for their abuse of the veto power in repeatedly obstructing much-needed action on urgent global issues, drowning out the collective voice of less powerful nations. This is most evident in the ongoing genocide and related crimes against humanity perpetrated in Gaza as well as the barefaced atrocities committed in Lebanon. Here, international mechanisms have not only failed to halt the bloodletting and carnage being carried out, but the Security Council itself is emasculated from holding Israel and the partners in genocide accountable. When the body entrusted as the world’s supreme authority for maintaining peace is unable to prosecute the most flagrant violations of international law or to put a lid on the expressions of collective human brutality, who else can?

Institutional trust deficit

These systemic fiascos reflect a collapse in the credibility of global governance institutions, that have grown increasingly detached from the needs of countries they claim to serve. The Bretton Woods institutions have failed to create a resilient and equitable global financial system, the WTO has faltered in upholding a fair and transparent rules-based trading order, and the Security Council has not only been absolutely useless in helping to maintain global peace and security but, by their inaction, effectively aiding and abetting in the perpetuation of massive atrocities. Together, these glaring missteps and gross lapses have eroded trust in multilateral frameworks, driving some nations inwards and towards unilateral approaches – and others towards closed alternative coalitions. To be sure, this institutional trust deficit is not a mere geopolitical construct but one that underpins economic growth and societal cooperation.

So then, what can be done, and what role can Malaysia play?

The IMF and the World Bank could start with rebalancing voice. Voting shares and representation should reflect the growing importance of nations in the Global South. Development financing tools must shift its focus from short-term fiscal targets to prioritise long-term development – using concessional tools for developing countries. Localised solutions may require closer collaboration with regional development banks instead of side-lining them.

The WTO, too, requires urgent modernisation to remain relevant in a rapidly changing global economy. Its rulebook must address new paradigms of trade, particularly digital commerce and e-commerce, while aligning trade policies with environmental sustainability to meet the demands of a world grappling with climate change. More quotidian, procedural reforms are equally important: a single nation should no longer be able to paralyse its core functions. The veto power held by the five permanent nations should be re-evaluated – with a view to expanding representation to regions historically excluded, such as Africa and Latin America.

Turning advocacy into action

In all, Malaysia has been consistent and clear in its advocacy for multilateral governance reform and equitable trade at both the APEC and G20 summits in November 2024. These imperatives reflect Malaysia’s growing aspiration and stature as a bridge builder between the Global North and South—while also aligning closely with its priorities as ASEAN Chair in 2025.

Throughout the summit, Brazil, under the exemplary leadership of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, championed the Global South, highlighting developing country priorities on the world stage. Lula urged wealthier nations to “acknowledge their historical responsibility” for the climate crisis and translate this into bolder climate targets. Brazil also spearheaded the creation of the Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty, rallying 148 founding members – including 82 countries, with Malaysia in it – in a collective push to confront the twin scourges of food insecurity and poverty across the globe.

But for ASEAN, especially under Malaysia’s chairmanship, the time for advocacy to turn into action is fast approaching. Though increasingly central to global trade and geopolitics, ASEAN has often been criticised for its lack of unified and decisive action, its vaunted centrality being tested against the reality of cohesiveness. This time, led by our dynamic and sometimes needfully strident Prime Minister, Malaysia’s leadership may yet be able to address this fragmentation, by rallying the bloc around a cohesive vision for global reform that prioritises not the wants and demands of the rich and powerful Global North, but the voices and needs of the generally poorer Global South and developing countries.

I hear whispers of some, not all, along the corridors of the international diplomatic corps, betraying overtones of superiority complex, rubbishing Malaysia’s bravado in punching way above its weight. Indeed, Malaysia may be a small trading nation in the grand scheme of the huge world economies, but we are brimming with the courage of convictions. It is not about laying bare one’s brute economic muscle, but about the use of soft power and the ability to influence friend and foe. It’s ballsy, but let us not forget: Fortis Fortuna Adiuvat!

-- BERNAMA

Prof Datuk Dr Faiz Abdullah is Chairman of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia.