• Minilaterals refer to informal and more targeted initiatives intended to address specific threats, contingencies, or security issues with a small number of states (usually three or four) sharing the same interest in resolving it within a finite period.
• These arrangements focus on a specific purpose rather than broad inclusivity without a permanent or formal institutional structure.
• Outcomes and commitments within minilaterals are non-binding and voluntary, relying on the willingness of the participating states.

Reasons for Rise of Minilateralism:

• • The evolving global order and the changing nature of threats have posed challenges to the continued relevance of multilateral frameworks in resolving local conflicts and issues.
  • The inconsistency in US global leadership and the rise of a multipolar world, along with geopolitical rivalry between the US and China, have highlighted fissures in multilateral organisations.
    • For instance, the UN Security Council''s permanent membership reflects outdated power structures and ineffectiveness.
  • Global institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) have struggled to reach consensus on complex issues due to diverse memberships and conflicting priorities.
  • Global problems can have regional variations. Minilateral organizations can tailor solutions to the needs of a smaller group facing a particular challenge.
  • The improvement of information and communications technology has facilitated the growth of minilaterals.
    • Informal communication methods have made it easier for states to engage in flexible and targeted cooperation, supporting the growth of minilateralism.
  • The fallout of the Covid-19 pandemic has further driven the emergence of strategic minilaterals and targeted ones focused on various issues, including supply chain resilience.
    • Example, India set up an electronic platform to help member countries of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) to fight the Covid-19 pandemic.
• Contrast with Multilateralism:
  • Multilateralism involves a formal effort by three or more states to build trust and avoid conflict through the institutionalisation and observation of rules and norms for a common vision of regional or international order.
  • Multilateral frameworks, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), emphasise broad and inclusive participation, unlike the more focused and flexible nature of minilaterals.
• Contrast with Regional Organisations:
  • Minilateralism focuses on urgent, specific issues and forms flexible, ad-hoc coalitions, like the Quad for Indo-Pacific security and economic concerns.
  • Regional organizations address a broad range of issues, including economic integration and security, through structured and formal cooperation, such as the European Union (EU).

Squad and QUAD

• Formation and Role of the ''Squad'':
• To enhance the Philippines'' maritime security, defense ministers from the US, Japan, Australia, and the Philippines convened in Hawaii to discuss advancing maritime cooperation. This new grouping has been informally named ''Squad''.
• It aims to strengthen collaborative efforts to counter Chinese aggression in the South China Sea (SCS).
• This formation is particularly significant given the physical confrontations between Chinese and Philippine forces, which have heightened tensions and prompted calls for proportional countermeasures by the Philippines.
• Comparison with the Quad:
• The Quad, comprising the US, Japan, Australia, and India, aims to ensure a secure and stable Indo-Pacific broadly, while the ''Squad'' specifically addresses the security dynamics in the SCS.

Advantages of Minilaterals

• Minilaterals allow countries with shared interests and values to bypass stagnant frameworks and resolve issues of common concern. For example, the Bangladesh-Bhutan-India-Nepal (BBIN) Motor Vehicles Agreement (MVA) was conceived even the SAARC failed to facilitate a similar initiative.
• Minilaterals provide a flexible and modular approach to international cooperation. They can be formed quickly to address specific issues and are not bound by the extensive formalities of multilateral frameworks.
• This flexibility is evident in trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which were concluded as minilateral agreements.
• The voluntary and non-binding nature of minilaterals allows for rapid decision-making and adaptation to changing circumstances.
• Minilaterals facilitate the creation of issue-specific partnerships and strategic alliances, particularly in regions like the Indo-Pacific.
• Examples include the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) and the Trilateral Cooperation and Oversight Group (TCOG), which address regional security concerns more effectively than larger, more formal organisations.
• In case of disasters, regional minilateral forums can promptly come to the rescue of affected nations.
• For example, India has sent the Indian Naval Ship (INS) Kesari, carrying food items and medical assistance teams, to countries in the southern Indian Ocean to deal with Covid-19 pandemic as part of a Mission Sagar initiative.

What are the Issues Associated With Minilateralism?

• Minilaterals can lead to forum shopping, undermining critical international organisations, and reducing accountability in global governance.
• By promoting voluntary commitments rather than legally binding ones, minilaterals may weaken the enforcement of international norms and standards.
• Preference for minilaterals may reduce the incentive for countries to engage with multilateral frameworks.
• This can impact the relevance and effectiveness of organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children''s Fund (UNICEF), which rely on multilateral cooperation for their programs.
• Minilateral success often depends on leadership, political will, and bilateral relations among members.
• Changes in political leadership or strained relations can derail minilateral initiatives, as seen with the initial failure of the Quad due to leadership changes in Japan and Australia.
• Minilateral alliances may have negative impacts on countries not part of the negotiations, reducing their incentive to engage with existing multilateral efforts.
• This was observed in the Doha trade negotiations, where the focus on plurilateral initiatives hindered broader multilateral progress.

Road ahead

• Integration with Multilaterals: Minilateralism should supplement rather than undermine the work of larger multilateral organisations.
• For example, in climate action, minilateralism can facilitate cooperation on renewable energy technologies and engage sub-national and non-government actors to develop innovative solutions.
• For example, the International Solar Alliance (ISA) is an action-oriented, member-driven, collaborative platform for increased deployment of solar energy technologies.
• Forward-Looking Perspectives: A forward-looking approach is essential to understand how minilaterals will impact security and strategic outcomes in various regions.
• Ensuring plurality and diversity in minilateral institutions can help accommodate different groupings'' needs, and address issues of shared interest.
• For example, under Security and Growth for All in the Region (SAGAR) India seeks to deepen economic and security cooperation with its maritime neighbours and assist in building their maritime security capabilities.
• Clear Objectives: To maximise their effectiveness, minilateralism should set concrete and measurable objectives.
• This approach will enhance their role as a tool of diplomacy and help streamline negotiations before multilateral platforms.
• The rise of the ''Squad'' and similar minilateral groupings highlights a strategic adaptation to the evolving security landscape in the Indo-Pacific.