The Bilateral Turn: Brexit and the Unravelling of the Global Order

  By: Jack Bardakjian   June 2025   When the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union in June 2016, the world debated what it meant for Britain. Would its economy tank? Would trade shrink? Would London lose its crown as a global financial capital? Years on, the answers to these questions remain contested. But the far more profound and less examined consequence of Brexit may lie elsewhere: it marked a defining fracture in the multilateral, globalist order that had dominated the post-Cold War world. Brexit, in hindsight, was not an aberration but a harbinger. It exposed—and accelerated—a tectonic shift towards a world order rooted not in supranational cooperation but in bilateral, self-interested deal-making. This is not merely a British story. Across the world, multilateralism is being quietly but systematically dismantled. From the United States’ retreat under Donald Trump from the Paris Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, to the questioning of NATO’s relevance, to China’s increasingly bilateral approach to Africa and Central Asia via the Belt and Road Initiative—this is a world where regional and global institutions are no longer seen as indispensable. As Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General of the WTO, warned in 2023, “We are moving dangerously close to a world where power, not principles, decides outcomes.” Supranational bodies—be they the EU, NAFTA (now USMCA), ASEAN, or even the United Nations—are increasingly constrained by nationalism, internal dysfunction, or outright rejection. António Guterres, the UN Secretary-General, has spoken of a “breakdown in trust between the global North and South” that is corroding collective action. Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, has acknowledged that we are now in a “polycrisis” world, where cooperation is in short supply and crises are entangled. The Shifting Ground in Africa Nowhere is this breakdown in multilateral confidence felt more poignantly than in Africa. The continent is witnessing a sharp reduction in traditional development assistance, most notably from the United States. Humanitarian aid cuts—raised publicly by Bill Gates—threaten food security, health initiatives, and infrastructure development. As Western retreat creates vacuums, they are being rapidly filled by China and Russia, who offer financial support, but often with implicit expectations: natural resource access, military alignments, or political loyalties. This pivot risks creating long-term dependencies that undermine sovereign economic development. Rather than becoming suppliers of unprocessed raw materials in return for external support, African nations must prioritise internal value addition. Manufacturing: Africa’s Hidden Lever A critical step forward lies in manufacturing. Africa cannot afford to remain a dumping ground for low-cost imports from Asia. Building domestic manufacturing capacity—especially in sectors like textiles, agribusiness, and light engineering—not only generates employment but also creates taxable economic activity and fosters skills transfer. Indigenous industries empower local populations, deepen economic resilience, and reduce reliance on volatile global supply chains. With abundant cotton production across countries like Mali, Egypt, and Tanzania, Africa is uniquely positioned to become a global hub for finished garments. Amid global tariff wars and reshoring trends, this may be a rare window of strategic opportunity. A coordinated effort—combining industrial policy, infrastructure investment, and export promotion—could see Africa emerge as a credible alternative to traditional manufacturing centres in Asia. Contested Influence and New Risks Paradoxically, even as Western nations scale down traditional aid, they are extending diplomatic invitations to sanctioned regimes—seeking strategic partnerships that blur the lines of ethical engagement. For Africa, this creates a messy diplomatic terrain: engagement brings investment, but at the risk of entanglement in foreign policy chessboards. But progress is possible. The example of Aliko Dangote’s 650,000-barrel-per-day oil refinery in Nigeria—a continent-shifting investment that positions Nigeria as an exporter of refined petroleum products to Europe and the US—proves that African enterprise can build world-class infrastructure, compete globally, and rewrite the narrative. Winners and Losers in a Fragmented World In this new order, nimble states and corporations that can navigate a thicket of bilateral arrangements stand to gain. Countries like India, Turkey, and Vietnam—each pursuing assertive trade diplomacy while resisting bloc allegiances—are early beneficiaries. Meanwhile, smaller nations lacking leverage may find themselves bypassed or beholden to unequal deals. For multinational corporations, particularly those with heavy exposure to regulated, integrated markets, this world poses challenges. Standards may diverge, supply chains could become more brittle, and legal protections more uneven. “The cost of doing business in a fractured world is rising,” observed Sean Doherty, Head of International Trade at the World Economic Forum. Impact on the Commodities Business Nowhere is this more acutely felt than in the physical commodities sector. Every link in the chain—from sourcing and procurement, to shipping and logistics, warehousing, distribution, and payment—is being reshaped. Sourcing and Purchasing: Commodity traders are already grappling with shifting rules of origin and the politicisation of supply sources. Sanctions regimes are proliferating. In a bilateral world, access to resources becomes a function of diplomacy, not just price. Shipping and Logistics: The re-routing of goods due to conflict (e.g., Red Sea disruptions), trade realignments, or regulatory divergence increases costs and complexity. Fragmented maritime standards and port regulations introduce new bottlenecks. Warehousing and Distribution: Cross-border movement of goods increasingly requires duplicative compliance and diversified infrastructure. Regional hubs may supplant global distribution centres. Payment Systems: The rise of alternative payment architectures—such as China’s CIPS, Russia’s SPFS, or blockchain-based systems—reflects a move away from SWIFT and the USD-dominated order. In a bilateral world, currency risk and payment friction increase. As Yanis Varoufakis has noted, “In the absence of a global monetary anchor, transactional trust becomes a geopolitical instrument.” Banking in the Bilateral Age Traditional banking systems—designed for a globalised, rules-based framework—are straining. Compliance burdens are rising, correspondent banking relationships are being severed, and KYC/AML enforcement is becoming both more politicised and decentralised. Financing trade in a bilateral world demands agility, robust risk management, and increasingly, localised financial infrastructure. “The global economy is decoupling into spheres of influence,” said Barack Obama in a 2024 interview. “If institutions don’t adapt, they will become irrelevant.” The Road Ahead: Timeline and Turbulence This shift is not a flick of a switch but a process—likely to […]