By Javier Surasky-
As we
navigate the evolving landscape of multilateralism, marked by the 75th
anniversary of the United Nations in 2020 and the subsequent “Our Common
Agenda” report, we approach a pivotal juncture at the forthcoming Summit of the
Future. This process aims to forge a fortified, efficacious, and efficient
multilateralism, with the UN at its helm, armed with the requisite tools to
confront today’s multifaceted global challenges.
A recurring
observation of mine pertains to the dual sub-agendas shaping both international
and national landscapes:
- The agenda of urgency: Addresses immediate crises and is time- and space-specific. The best example is the humanitarian disaster response.
- The structural agenda: It seeks to instigate deep-seated changes within the international order to tackle the root causes of emergent issues, such as proactively addressing climate change rather than its catastrophic outcomes.
The
interconnectedness of these agendas, underscored in the “Brahimi Report” on UN
peace operations, advocates for a seamless integration of humanitarian and
developmental efforts, now encapsulated by the principle of sustainability.
An
imbalance where one agenda monopolizes resources or priority to the detriment
of the other jeopardizes the effectiveness of governance, mirroring the “short
blanket” conundrum: coverage at one end results in exposure at the other. For
instance, in 2022, for the first time in a decade, UN funds designated for
humanitarian action surpassed those for developmental promotion—a testament to
the urgent agenda’s encroachment upon the global multilateral space. While
urgent responses offer more tangible, immediate outcomes, they do not address
underlying issues, prompting states to lean towards expedient allocations.
At the forefront of sustainable development, regional tendencies appear to favor the structural agenda, prompting us to consider whether global and regional multilateral responses—urgent and structural, respectively—are complementary or merely reflect the necessity to bridge a gap better served at the regional rather than the national level.
Triangular Cooperation and a Revamped Multilateralism
As a facet
of South-South Cooperation (SSC) involving multiple actors, triangular
cooperation epitomizes inherent multilateralism. Significant strides in
its systematization have been made by the Ibero-American Program for the
Strengthening of South-South Cooperation
(PIFCSS by its Spanish acronym) of the Ibero-American General
Secretariat, which conceptualizes triangular cooperation as a modality of SSC
“in which a set of actors participate, all of whom can make different types of
contributions (technical, financial, or others), distributing the exercise of
three roles: the so-called first contributor and recipient (one or several developing
countries each), and the second contributor (developing country, developed
country, regional or multilateral organization, or some form of association
between them). The differential aspect is determined by the role of the first
contributor, who acts as responsible for capacity strengthening.” [1]
Yet the PIFCSS’s definition of triangular cooperation
requires clarification:
- All participants in triangular cooperation offer diverse contributions, whether technical or financial.
- Rather than "distributing" roles, these actors perform at least one distinct part in harmony toward a common aim.
- The explanatory commentary following the role designations overcomplicates the portrayal. It undervalues instances where developing nations, such as Brazil, provide financial backing.
- The essence of triangular cooperation is not solely vested in the role of the first contributor but in the synergy of differing actors collaboratively fulfilling the Triangular roles.
The debate on multilateralism reform is consequential for
Triangular Cooperation. Questions arise as to how it will integrate future
generations, align with digital technology agreements, incorporate foresight
tools, and adjust to new metrics of sustainable development beyond GDP.
Following The Summit of the Future, triangular cooperation actors must tailor
outcomes to their specific contexts.
We must now address the gap created by the missed opportunity at the BAPA+40 meeting to spotlight South-South and Triangular Cooperation’s roles in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. A proactive initiative is imperative.
Proposition for Action:
In this perceptive, we engage in the overlooked opportunity
presented at the Buenos Aires assembly. Following the Summit of the Future,
nations active within the PIFCSS and the G-77, with support from the PIFCSS
countries that do not participate in the G-77, should advocate for a Summit of
the South on Triangular Cooperation.
The summit’s foundation should reinforce and align
South-South Cooperation with the vision of evolving multilateralism. The
discourse should be informed by robust evidence and, importantly, by the wealth
of experience accessible in Triangular Cooperation, leading to tangible,
deliverable actions.
With an operational timeline targeting late 2025 or early
2026, there is ample scope to digest and adapt the dynamics from the Summit of
the Future in synchronization with the Second World Summit on Social
Development preparatory process. The preparatory trajectory could interface
regionally with the Regional Forums on Sustainable Development gatherings,
thereby coupling and reinforcing the triangular cooperation dialogue with
ongoing efforts in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals.
Countries actively participating in triangular cooperation
from the developed and developing world must exhibit their resolve toward a
strengthened global multilateralism and be proficient in confronting
contemporary exigencies. Through a strategic recalibration of Triangular
Cooperation, balancing immediate and structural imperatives becomes plausible,
thereby erecting a robust, sustainable underpinning for the future.
Addressing the pressing and structural aspects
proportionally offers a pathway toward ameliorating sustainable transition
challenges. Hence, it is an opportune moment to contemplate and implement
measures commensurate with the scale of potential risks and challenges
confronting us.
In summary, smart actors ensure their vessels are fortified before delving into troubled waters; similarly, we must fortify our triangular cooperation to make it capable of facing the formidable trials ahead.
[1] Programa Iberoamericano para el Fortalecimiento de la Cooperación Sur-Sur (2015). Guía Orientadora para la gestión de la cooperación triangular en Iberoamérica. Documento de trabajo Nº 8, p. 21