Multilateralism Matters, But How?

Abstract

Whereas Ruggie and his associates have expended a great deal of effort in explaining how and why the principled meanings of multilateralism became institutionalized in most of the international organizations set up since 1945, less attention has been paid to the questions how they influence state policy today and whether they are likely to continue to do so in the future. This article discusses these questions and, in addition, examines whether the favourable view of multilateralism, which is predominant in the literature, can stand up to reality. The impact of multilateralism on Yugoslav policies pursued by the involved great powers is examined in an analysis of whether the great powers adhered to the multilateral consensus principle in situations where they found it inconvenient. The analysis shows that the great powers have generally respected the consensus principle although it repeatedly forced them to act in ways they would have preferred not to. While this finding suggests that the existing multilateral order is durable and effective with respect to reducing great power tension, its implications for conflict management are less benign. In Yugoslavia, adherence to the multilateral consensus principle often became an excuse for inaction and the emphasis placed on maintaining a consensus among the great powers often prevented the implementation of more effective policies.