Global institutions and the world order

My take

The IMF, the World Bank, the UN and the G20 are still indispensable. But they're being tested in ways their founders never imagined, as conflict, energy shocks and new technology outpace the rules built to manage them. Walking away from multilateralism isn't the answer. Holding these bodies to a higher standard is, because international cooperation only works when people trust the institutions behind it. Where accountability is missing, someone has to build it. FIFA's red card scandal exposed how weak accountability is in global sport, and I've argued the UN should bring anti-corruption efforts together into a single watchdog, so the world can stop reacting to scandals and start preventing them.

Why I see it this way

I've sat at the table. As Kazakhstan's Governor at the World Bank, and as Deputy Prime Minister through 2008, I saw how much a country depends on international institutions working when it matters, and how quickly confidence drains when they don't. Later, in banking and fintech, I learned the same lesson at the scale of a single firm. Trust is built slowly and lost fast, and strong oversight is what protects it. That's why I'm wary of anyone who treats regulators or international bodies as dispensable.

What I'm watching

I'm watching whether the IMF, World Bank and UN can stay credible as conflict in the Middle East, and the energy shock that has come with it, tests their ability to steady the global economy. I'm watching how trade tensions and great-power rivalry are fragmenting the world economy, and what weaker coordination means for markets and for ordinary consumers. And I'm watching whether governments build the oversight that new technology demands before something breaks, not after.