Middle Powers: The Future of Diplomacy?

Global governance has recently undergone dramatic changes; some might even say it deteriorated. It seems like the US has given up its responsibility as the protector of liberal democracy and multilateral institutions become increasingly less influential. A new global order is on the rise which reshuffles global politics. Out of this chaos emerges a new, powerful diplomatic development. Instead of global players dominating the world order, smaller middle powers are stepping onto the stage and shaping a new approach to international relations that might not even be merely reactive but rather necessary.

For the longest time, the global political order has been relatively set. After The Iron Curtain fell, the US hegemony was undeniable, and the famous political theorist Fukuyama (1992) even proclaimed liberal democracy as the final form of governance.

But as the 21st century progressed, the bolster of global governance began to crumble: Slowly but surely, the US was giving up its unofficial mandate as “police of the world” by becoming less committed to multilateral organisations and global security promises. For example, the retraction from Afghanistan under the Biden administration or leaving the Paris climate agreement.

This escalated under the latest Trump administration, which not only blatantly discusses the idea of dropping out of NATO but focuses more on transactional diplomacy, where security is only granted in return to resource concessions. Examples include the new agreement with Ukraine (Baskaran & Schwartz, 2025) or supervising peace talks in the DRC (Ekanem, 2025), always with one eye on critical minerals. China has been playing this game of interest-driven diplomacy much longer, and Russia rather destabilized the global order with its invasion of Ukraine. This uncertainty created by the US and other great powers and the irregularity in diplomacy led to the formation of new partnerships which account for strategic maneuverability and are based on profit rather than overarching principles. The US retreating from global responsibility and focusing on its own interests is one reason why unipolar governance is being replaced by a multipolar world order.

Photo by Rock Staar on Unsplash

Another one is the increasingly complex geopolitical system. Since 1990 over 30 states have joined the UN, intergovernmental networks and organisations increased substantially, the global South’s share of the global GDP increased from 19% to 42% (Born, 2023), and South-to-South trade doubled. These developments are a natural result of shifting power dynamics that also include the transfer of global diplomatic responsibility from hegemonies to other forces.  Among this “new pluralism” middle powers gain more and more control over diplomatic governance since they do not want to put up with the self-serving policies and irregular diplomacy of great powers any longer (Tagliapietra & Casarões, 2025). 

Middle powers are countries that, while not great powers, have significant influence in international relations through diplomacy, regional concentration, and more flexible partnerships.

Other than traditional powers that focus more on ideological alliances or military strength, middle powers concentrate on solutions over status and act as bridge-builders detached from values. Their diplomacy focuses on making flexible, issue-based partnerships rather than following rigid, ideologically driven geopolitical blocs. This flexibility allows middle powers to bring diverse, sometimes even contradictory, perspectives together. A prime example are the BRICS members. Political agendas differ, value systems are not aligned but the economic partnership still remains (Bradford, 2024). 

But middle powers also exert power through so-called niche diplomacy, where they focus on one specific issue. Norway, for instance, is at the forefront of climate change adaptation, whereas South Africa demonstrated strong judicial diplomacy when challenging Israel at the International Criminal Court of Justice. They are role models sometimes even for countries with much bigger influence (LSE, 2024). 

Critics may accuse middle powers of having double standards.

How can India be part of BRICS while simultaneously fighting a war against Pakistan, which is heavily funded by China? Some might call this selective engagement and inconsistent, while others say it’s strategic realism. But let us not forget that without middle powers and their flexible diplomacy, some of the biggest conflicts might never find a solution. It was Türkiye who recently hosted the meeting that attempted a ceasefire agreement between Ukraine and Russia, and the last G20 Foreign Ministers meeting where representatives of the two countries got together was hosted this year in no other place than Johannesburg, South Africa. It would be unlikely that the two parties would have come together in Washington (Bradford, 2024). 

In times where diplomatic flexibility seems to question the unilateral world order, middle-power diplomacy might be the answer. Instead of bloc-based alignments, we see fluid coalitions and multi-alignment strategies that allow states to diversify partnerships, and navigate great power rivalry, while simultaneously upholding their own interests. Yet these multi-alignment strategies often mask uncomfortable compromises and unclear loyalties.

Is that the diplomacy of the 21st century? 

Bibliography

1. Baskaran, G., & Schwartz, M. (2025, May 16). What to Know About the Signed U.S.-Ukraine Minerals Deal. Center for Strategic & International Studies. https://www.csis.org/analysis/what-know-about-signed-us-ukraine-minerals-dea

2. Born, D. (2023, December 21). Global South: Beyond BRICS. Roland Berger. https://www.rolandberger.com/en/Insights/Publications/Global-South-Beyond-BRICS.html#:~:text=Although%20not%20strictly%20geographical%2C%20the,1990%20to%2042%25%20in%202022.

3. Colin Bradford (2024), “Toward a new era in global relations”,Berlin: Global Solutions Journal, Issue 10. 

4. Ekanem, S. (2025, June 11). US gives conditions for Rwanda-DR Congo peace deal. Business Insider Africa. https://africa.businessinsider.com/local/lifestyle/us-gives-conditions-for-rwanda-dr-congo-peace-deal/rbh1209l

5. Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man. Penguin Books.

6. LSE. (2024, June 13). Global middle powers and the changing world order | LSE Festival [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTi8svUnZEc

7. Tagliapietra, A., & Casarões, G. (2025). SHAPING a NEW WORLD? MIDDLE POWERS AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE.

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed herein belong solely to the columnist and do not represent the official position of our think-tank. Humanotions cannot be held liable for any consequences arising from this content. Content published on Humanotions may contain links to third-party sources. Humanotions is not responsible for the content of these external links. Please refer to our Legal Notices & Policies page for legal details and our Guidelines For Republishing page for republication terms.