By Daeng Supriyanto SH MH, Lawyer and Global Geopolitical Analyst
Within the ever-evolving and complexly dynamic realm of international relations, the decision by the United States (US) to withdraw from the United Nations (UN) and 66 related international institutions represents a historic event with profound philosophical, normative, and strategic dimensions. As a lawyer with an understanding of international law principles and intergovernmental organizational structures, as well as a global geopolitical analyst who monitors developments in power dynamics and cross-national relations at the international level, I view this decision not merely as a foreign policy choice by a single nation, but as a paradigmatic shift with far-reaching implications for the global security architecture, international peace system, and the future of cross-national cooperation in addressing humanity’s shared challenges.
Epistemologically, the US withdrawal decision reflects a shift in perspectives regarding the role of international organizations in the contemporary international relations system. Within the tradition of classical geopolitical thought, international organizations such as the UN are recognized as vital instruments for maintaining global peace and security, facilitating cross-national cooperation, and serving as a forum for resolving conflicts peacefully through diplomatic and international legal mechanisms. However, this perspective has undergone significant transformation among certain circles in the US, which perceive international organizations as tools that restrict national sovereignty and undermine US national interests. This viewpoint reflects the resurgence of strong nationalist ideology in US foreign policy, which prioritizes national interests as the primary concern and holds that international cooperation should only be pursued when it provides clear benefits to the nation.
From the perspective of international law, the US decision to withdraw from the UN and related international institutions carries complex implications for the international legal system that has evolved over more than a century. Normatively, the UN—as the world’s largest and most representative international organization—was established under the 1945 UN Charter, which serves as the legal foundation for the modern international relations system. UN member states, including the US as one of the founding nations and a permanent member of the Security Council, have a legal obligation to respect and abide by the provisions of the UN Charter and the decisions adopted by the organization. Nevertheless, the principle of national sovereignty—which forms the basis of international law—also recognizes that every nation has the right to withdraw from an international organization, provided such action is carried out in accordance with procedures stipulated in the organization’s founding charter or agreement. While the US withdrawal decision may be legally justifiable within the framework of the national sovereignty principle, it has significant implications for the authority and effectiveness of international organizations and the international legal system as a whole.
Historically, the US has played an exceptionally significant role in the establishment and development of international organizations since the end of World War II. The US was among the most active nations in founding the UN and various other international institutions, such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Trade Organization (WTO), as part of efforts to build a more peaceful and prosperous international relations system following the devastation caused by the world war. US contributions in the form of funding, human resources, and political support have been among the primary factors sustaining the continuity and effectiveness of these international organizations. However, over time and amid shifting global geopolitical dynamics, the US perspective on international organizations has undergone substantial change—from one of support and active engagement to a more critical and skeptical stance regarding their role and effectiveness in addressing increasingly complex global challenges.
From the standpoint of global geopolitics, the US withdrawal decision has broad implications for global power balance and the dynamics of relations among major nations. As a superpower that has led the international relations system for more than seven decades, the US has played a central role in maintaining global geopolitical stability and coordinating international responses to various global challenges such as terrorism, climate change, and global pandemics. The US withdrawal from international organizations will create a potential power vacuum that could be filled by other superpowers such as China, Russia, or the European Union—transforming the global power map and potentially leading to more intense power competition at the international level. Furthermore, this decision also risks fragmenting the international relations system, where nations may be more inclined to form regional or bilateral blocs rather than cooperate through universal international organizational frameworks.
Another equally critical challenge is the impact of this decision on the international community’s ability to address global challenges that require comprehensive cross-national cooperation. Issues such as climate change, global trade, global public health, and transnational terrorism cannot be resolved by a single nation alone—even by a superpower like the US. These issues require close cooperation and effective coordination among all nations worldwide through appropriate international organizational frameworks. The US withdrawal from international organizations will diminish the international community’s capacity to take effective collective action against these challenges, potentially leading to partial and uncoordinated responses that could exacerbate the problems. Additionally, this decision may also erode the trust of other nations in the US commitment to maintaining global stability and working together to achieve humanity’s shared goals.
As a lawyer who understands the importance of international law as a foundation for resolving cross-national conflicts and protecting the rights of nations and individuals at the international level, I view the US decision to withdraw from the UN and related international institutions as a concerning development for the future of the international legal system. International organizations such as the UN have served as platforms for developing and implementing international law principles, as well as mechanisms for peacefully resolving cross-national disputes through arbitration and international court processes. The US withdrawal from these organizations will reduce the authority and effectiveness of such international legal mechanisms, potentially leading to a tendency to resolve conflicts through means inconsistent with international law principles. Nevertheless, I also recognize that there are valid criticisms of international organizations regarding issues of efficiency, accountability, and representativeness—matters that need to be the subject of reflection and reform to ensure these organizations remain relevant and effective in addressing increasingly complex global challenges.
In the context of developing multilateral international relations, the US withdrawal decision from the UN and related international institutions also carries important implications for the future of cross-national cooperation across various fields. While there has been a growing trend toward regional leadership and bilateral cooperation in recent years, multilateral international organizations remain the most effective forum for addressing issues with global impact that require participation from all nations worldwide. The US withdrawal from these organizations will bring changes to the dynamics of multilateral cooperation, with other nations that are more supportive of multilateralism becoming increasingly active in leading and coordinating international cooperation efforts. Additionally, this decision may also serve as a catalyst for international organizations to implement necessary reforms to become more effective, efficient, and representative, as well as better equipped to address existing global challenges.
As a global geopolitical analyst, I view the US decision to withdraw from the UN and related international institutions as part of a broader shift in global geopolitical dynamics—where the international relations system dominated by a single superpower is beginning to transition toward a more multipolar system. This transformation has been accelerated by various factors, such as the economic and political growth of emerging nations like China, India, and Brazil, as well as the emergence of global challenges that require more inclusive and collaborative approaches. While the US withdrawal decision has significant short-term impacts, I believe that in the long term, the need for international cooperation will persist, and international organizations will continue to adapt and evolve to meet the changing demands of the times.
In conclusion, the United States’ decision to withdraw from the UN and 66 related international institutions is a global geopolitical event with profound implications for the international relations system, international law, and the future of cross-national cooperation. While this decision may be justifiable from the perspective of US national interests and the principle of national sovereignty, its impacts on global stability, the ability to address shared challenges, and the future of the international legal system cannot be ignored. As a global community, we need to view this decision as an opportunity for deep reflection on the role and function of international organizations, as well as to implement necessary reforms to make them more effective, efficient, and representative. We must also work together to build a more inclusive, collaborative international relations system based on principles of international law and human rights that are respected by all nations.
