Statement by the Permanent Representative of Brazil to the United Nations, Ambassador Sérgio França Danese, at the Open Debate hosted by China on “Practicing multilateralism, reforming and improving global governance” - February 18th, 2025

­­­­­Thank you, President, and allow me to extend my thanks to our briefers today.

Just a few years ago, there was vigorous debate on whether the world was or was not becoming more "multipolar". That debate has now mostly ended, with everyone recognizing that we are now in a multipolar order.

The question is what we make of it.

Many have read this rising multipolarity as a sign of a more dangerous, more unstable world. With many poles, the argument goes, the chances of disagreement between the poles increase, as do the points of failure in the system.

Yet history shows us that this is not necessarily the case. One of the longest periods of European peace was precisely the century between the Treaty of Vienna and the outbreak of the First World War, when the hegemonic European system was multipolar. Similarly, the détente in the Cold War - a strict bipolar system - was made possible, in large part, by a "multipolar moment" of sorts, where the US, China, the USSR, Western Europe and the Non-Aligned Movement could form configurations that mitigated the existing Cold War tensions.

There is clearly enough potential for a multipolar order to be stable and peaceful. What distinguishes a multipolar order that is stable from one that is unstable is one word: diplomacy. And its basis is and must be international law and dialogue.

Diplomacy, through the Congress System, is what allowed the post-Napoleonic order to remain relatively peaceful in Europe. Intense high-level diplomacy was also what fueled the multipolar system of the détente period.

How we engage in diplomacy also matters. The more institutionalized diplomacy of the 19th century, with its congresses and regular "summits", appears to have worked better, and lasted longer, than the more "ad hoc" diplomacy of the 20th Century, which finally gave way to the "New Cold War" of the 1980s.

Mr. President,

One reason why multipolarity may not have thrived by the end of the 20th Century is that the UN remained relegated to a secondary role. It lacked a more solid institutional framework, which made it vulnerable to the shifting political winds of the following decade.

Considering that a real multipolar system is taking shape, our challenge is to turn to the architecture of multipolarity. This means, essentially, making the UN fit for purpose and truly multilateral and multicultural.

It also means leveraging other regional and plurilateral organizations that can work with the UN, and taking into account the contribution of regional, subregional and bilateral arrangements to the prevention and peaceful resolution of disputes.

       For a stable and peaceful multilateral order, we envision a layered architecture, with three tiers:

- A reformed UN, where all of the poles of the system are represented at its highest decision-making bodies.

- A network of strengthened cross-regional arrangements, such as the G20 and the BRICS, which can help either with thematic areas or in deepening cooperation between its members and the international community as a whole.

- Finally, a strong grounding in regional organizations. These organizations should be able to fluidly communicate both with each other and with the tiers above, bringing local expertise and helping to defuse tensions before they escalate to the global level.

Mr. President,

We are currently witnessing a reshaping of the international order. This is a moment of acceleration of historical processes, marked by significant instability and the gradual breakdown of the consensus within the collective security system that was established after the cold war.

In an environment marked by growing geopolitical rivalry, major powers have focused on enhancing their strategic capabilities, investing in advanced weaponry and military technologies and in ensuring access to critical resources.

These tendencies have impacted multilateralism, as they deepen polarization, and sideline important debates on global issues related to peace and sustainable development.

We must reaffirm our commitment to the principles of the United Nations charter, international law, and multilateralism, and to an international order that is beneficial for the whole international community.

In 2024, Brazil chose the reform of global governance as one of our three priorities during the presidency of the G20.

At the second Foreign Ministers meeting of the G20, open to all UN member states, during the high-level week of the GA in 2024, Brazil launched a call to action to promote the implementation, through concrete actions, of the global governance reform proposal, taking a step beyond the summit of the future. We invite all member states to look carefully into that proposal.

Mr. President,

The institutions we have today, imperfect as they are, already put us in a better position than we were in during the 20th century.

Our task now is to find ways to adapt them so that they can facilitate the effective diplomacy necessary for our new multipolar order. If we can combine the diplomatic energies of past eras of multipolarity with the robust institutions built over the past decades, then we have the foundations for a multipolar architecture than can be truly peaceful, stable and able to deliver the prosperity that all of our nations seek.

Thank you.