This “Golden Age” of multilateralism is now over, and gave way to renewed strategic rivalry, weaker major-power consensus, declining confidence in multilateral cooperation, and a growing number of alternative forums through which states could pursue their interests. As geopolitical conditions changed, member states rarely revisited what they had assigned to the UN, reflecting that international institutions and the responsibilities that states entrust them with tend to evolve more slowly than the political environment in which they emerge. The result has been a widening mismatch between what member states expect of the UN and what they are prepared to support. This also changes the meaning of the 2026 selection process. The central question is no longer simply who is best qualified to lead the organization, but whether member states will provide the conditions under which effective leadership remains possible
This commentary unpacks the “office” of the United Nations Secretary-General over at the Fiker Institute.