In recent years, a significant surge in nationalist ideologies has reshaped global
political discourse and redefined how states engage with international
institutions. Once considered the backbone of post-World War II diplomacy,
multilateralism now faces growing skepticism and resistance. This study
explores the relationship between rising nationalism and the weakening of
multilateral frameworks by examining policy reversals in key democratic
nations such as the United States, India, the United Kingdom, and Brazil.
Through a comparative analysis, this research assesses how nationalist
governments have reversed, redefined, or withdrawn from multilateral
commitments across domains such as climate change, trade, immigration, and
global health cooperation. The study employs a qualitative approach using
policy document reviews, leader speeches, and international treaty data,
combined with a quantitative overview of multilateral agreement withdrawals
and voting pattern shifts at the United Nations. Two key tables are included: (1)
sector-wise multilateral policy reversals per country and (2) correlation between
nationalist rhetoric intensity and multilateral disengagement.
Findings indicate a direct association between nationalist rhetoric and
multilateral pullbacks, with varying intensities and motivations. In the U.S., ―America First‖ policies led to exits from climate and trade deals; India
promoted strategic autonomy over UN-centered cooperation; Brexit exemplified UK‘s rejection of regional multilateralism; Brazil‘s nationalist leadership
marginalized WHO and Amazon protection treaties.
The paper concludes that nationalism, while addressing sovereign concerns,
often undermines global collective action, weakening responses to transnational
threats like pandemics and climate change. It calls for rethinking multilateralism
through a more flexible, culturally sensitive, and sovereignty-respecting
framework that can coexist with nationalistic aspirations.