Beyond Procedure: Assessing Institutional Design and Effectiveness in Global Security Dialogues

BIPSS Adjunct Research Associate Alice Daversin argues in this commentary that today’s global security dialogues are trapped in “procedural ritualism”—rich in meetings, statements, and diplomacy, yet poor in real conflict resolution. Drawing on cases like the UN Security Council and the ASEAN Regional Forum, she shows how institutional designs that prioritize inclusivity, consensus, and sovereignty often sacrifice effectiveness, leaving crises from Rohingya displacement to climate security unresolved. Daversin contends that this paralysis is not accidental but built into 20th-century governance models, pushing states toward minilateral and informal forums for results. She urges a shift beyond performative multilateralism toward adaptive, issue-based coalitions and new metrics of effectiveness that focus on real behavioral change, crisis management, and local ownership in global and regional security.