The promise of multilateralism is under siege, and the evidence is stark.

The recent impasses at COP29, APEC and the G20 summits reveal a troubling trend: multilateral forums have become battlegrounds for protectionist policies and geopolitical rivalries rather than platforms for resolving shared global challenges.

This failure has profound implications, especially for emerging economies like Indonesia, which depend on a rules-based global order to unlock their economic potential.

Protectionism did not just emerge with Donald Trump. While he did popularize “America First”, protectionist policies span the globe.

United States President Joe Biden’s administration, for instance, has enacted measures like the Inflation Reduction Act, favoring domestic products under the guise of security and climate goals.

Similarly, the European Union’s Green Deal imposes barriers that disadvantage emerging markets, limiting their ability to compete. This inward turn signals a broader retreat from the principles of open and fair trade.

Ironically, it is Chinese President Xi Jinping who has emerged as an unlikely champion of free trade. Once criticized for unfair trade practices, China now advocates for open markets at multilateral forums while the West retreats into protectionist silos.

Xi’s overtures at APEC to deepen trade partnerships in Asia underscore this shift, as does Beijing’s growing leadership in trade agreements like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

For Indonesia and other emerging economies, the stakes could not be higher.

Free and open markets have historically allowed nations with lower labor costs and less stringent environmental standards to climb the development ladder. Yet, as Indonesia begins to reap these advantages, Western countries are raising barriers in the name of environmental and labor protections.

This reek of hypocrisy. The very nations that benefited from loose regulations during their industrialization now expect others to leapfrog into sustainability without the same economic opportunities.

However, Indonesia must also hold a mirror to itself. We cannot credibly demand free markets abroad while resisting competition at home.

The growing apprehension over Chinese products entering our market is a case in point. If we value free trade, we must embrace it with consistency, recognizing that it benefits both producers and consumers.

Instead of aiming for self-sufficiency in every sector, we should focus on areas where we hold a comparative advantage. Countries like Singapore, despite being heavily reliant on food imports, demonstrate the resilience of economies integrated into global trade networks.

For Indonesia, it makes sense to aim for self-sufficiency in commodities like rice, but fretting over milk imports – in a country where many are prone to lactose intolerance – is counterproductive.

On a different note, the failure of the G20 to address pressing global issues is another symptom of the multilateral system’s malaise.

The forum has increasingly been derailed by geopolitical posturing, with the G7 bloc seeking to isolate Russia and China instead of addressing shared challenges like climate change, poverty and disaster resilience.

When geopolitical disputes dominate its agenda, the G20 loses its relevance, pushing nations toward alternative forums like BRICS, which are perceived as more inclusive.

If the multilateral system allows conflicts to overshadow its work, we can forget about meaningful progress on existential threats such as climate change and poverty.

Constructive dialogue demands that nations engage in good faith, acknowledging and respecting each other’s differences. Ironically, Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy may prove less intrusive in domestic affairs than Biden’s value-laden diplomacy, which risks alienating nations that do not align with Western ideals.

Indonesia must advocate for a multilateral system that delivers tangible results for all, not just the powerful few.

If Western nations are unwilling to engage constructively, they should step aside rather than obstruct progress. The government should take bold steps to support a collective future that depends on cooperation, not division.