For quite some time, the international community has provided spaces in order to resolve conflicts or problems that affect all States and thereby ensure actions for the benefit of the entire community without harming some of the countries as a participatory way of counteracting these inconveniences. This is even the message wielded by Antonio Guterres, Secretary General of the United Nations, at the last High Level meeting of the General Assembly, who stated that “our future is based on solidarity. We must repair the broken trust. We must revitalize our multilateral project ”.
The aforementioned spaces could be in the organizations of the United Nations system or in regional institutions of economic, political and even military integration or in any non-governmental conference or meetings of Heads of States, which allowed different speakers to express their points of views on particular issues, such as climate change and environment, nuclear weapons, Israeli Arab conflict, self-determination of peoples, international humanitarian law and conflict zones, however, at present, there is an argument that has penetrated a lot in the international sentiment, in the sense that multilateralism is in crisis.
If the aforementioned fact is observed in retrospect, it could be said that it is not entirely true. The great powers continue to hold their meetings in a normal way, the central European states continue to promote solutions to the ailments they face, Russia and China are still pending their affairs; all this, regardless of the unilateral manifestations of each country in favor of its interests and that do not affect multilateralism. So what about multilateralism? The obvious answer is in the United States. Because the United States is considered a great power and has an undeniable global influence, all its actions can have serious repercussions for the world of international understanding.
In view of the fact that the current president of the United States decided to leave the Paris Agreement, leave the World Health Organization (WHO) at a time of pandemic by COVID-19, where, even, the death figures of Americans they are still growing, and likewise, leaving the nuclear agreement with Iran, meddling in the election of the IDB, as well as unilaterally making concessions to Israel over Jerusalem; It could be said that in the field of multilateralism this has represented a severe blow for the simple fact of coming from the United States, bringing that, points of the international agenda that were already well advanced presented a notable setback.
Contrary to what happened, and always with very dark flats that cannot be overlooked, the United States has been an important icon or, better said, essential for multilateralism, this can be verified in two things. First, the one who has the idea of creating a permanent International Organization where there can be understanding between the Nations, is precisely Woodrow Wilson within his fourteen points, then President of the United States. Second: Who used the term "United Nations" for the first time in the context of the international sphere, as we know it today, was President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in the context of what was called the United Nations Conference on Organization. International in 1942. In addition to the countless efforts made by the United States in order to maintain spaces for the exchange of ideas, which is also reflected in the fact that the United States has been the main economic promoter of the United Nations. Taking advantage of the message left in the United Nations General Assembly, the United States needs to change its steps and support a world where dialogue is more important than unilateral actions.