International 
 

International

All Show, No Substance

In this year-ender, SouthAsia explores whether global diplomacy has created a meaningful impact or was it just a spectacle

By Mariam Khan | December 2025


In 2025, the international theater of diplomacy hosted numerous shows around the world’s power corridors, and then some turfs of the emerging power hotspots. While most shows were mere optics, marking almost no change in the lives of the citizens of the world.

In this year-ender, in a year of high-profile summits, social media diplomacy, and performative politics, SouthAsia Magazine aims to explore whether global diplomacy has created a meaningful impact, or was it just a spectacle, frozen in time, to be framed and hung in the boardrooms and offices of the movers and shakers of the current era.

“I would say that, in the world of high-level diplomacy, 2025 is more “Optics” than “Outcomes” when it comes to international agreements. Many “agreements” reached this year are nothing more right now than promises on paper (such as the round of agreements Trump just reached with many Asian nations),” states Dr Paul Poast, Deputy Dean of Doctoral Education, Social Science Division and Associate Professor, Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago (UChicago).

Speaking to Dr Carlos Manuel Martin Gonzalez, Associate Professor in International Relations at Universidad Europea de Valencia (UEV) in Spain, SouthAsia Magazine enquired whether, in 2025, showcase diplomacy primarily served as a stage for political performance or was it used as an effective tool for resolving conflicts? “My perception is that showcase diplomacy has served as a stage for political performance by China and, since this year, the US. Meanwhile, the EU still tries to use it as an effective tool for resolving conflicts,” he mentions, adding that “traditional diplomacy is silent, working behind the scenes, only to reveal its results when the agreement is finalized and ready to be presented to the audience.

As for Dr Kenneth Holland, Adjunct Professor of Political Science at the University of Utah, “Effective diplomacy is always conducted behind (closed) doors,” that version that is conducted in public, “is always for show”, he notes.

The world witnessed the Sharm El-Sheikh Peace Summit, also known as the Gaza Peace Summit, where US President Donald Trump, along with leaders of Egypt, Qatar, and Türkiye, signed a declaration following negotiations in Egypt. During these negotiations, Hamas and Israel agreed on the first phase of a ceasefire aimed at bringing peace to Gaza. Not too long ago, President Trump hosted his Russian counterpart, President Vladimir Putin of Russia, at the 2025 Russia–United States summit, also known as the Alaska Summit. These summits, as part of a growing trend of summit diplomacy, are they of any substance or merely optics?

For Dr Gonzalez, the International Relations Professor from UEV in Spain, the citizens’ expanded access to information is why there is excessive scrutiny of these summits. “Once we have access to a large amount of daily information, our perception of our and others’ leaders/governments’ performance is under scrutiny. Noting the results in Central Asia and Southeast Asia from the Trump Administration, “it is clear that the time invested behind the scenes has been the most important factor,” he shares.


What about the outcomes post-summits? While the first stage of the Gaza Peace Plan was signed and framed in front of the world, are the Palestinians at peace? Has the Israeli atrocity stopped? Is the Russia-Ukraine war coming to an end? Are international mediators constrained by politics or optics? According to an Al Jazeera report, till the time this piece went to print, post Hamas-Israel ceasefire, starting on October 10, 2025, Israelis continue to kill Palestinians “on all but six of those days; Israeli attacks have killed at least 242 Palestinians and injured 622… with the Israeli military violating the ceasefire at least 125 times”.

Speaking of the resolution of major conflicts for which the world leaders were seen convening at summits throughout the year, Dr Holland, Adjunct Professor of Political Science from Utah, states that “These conflicts can only be resolved if one side wins a decisive victory on the battlefield or a third party like the United States exerts irresistible economic or military pressure.”

2025 turned out to be a year of diplomatic spectacle and strategic failure

With multilateral institutions like the UN, G7, SCO, and ASEAN, to name a few, convening grand summits, tangible progress remains limited. For Dr Holland, “Without the leadership of the United States or China, it will be difficult for multilateral organizations to achieve sustainable progress. Only Washington and Beijing have the power to reward or coerce members.”

Speaking of economic diplomacy, how can it be reformed to yield measurable results for developing economies? Staying realistic is the way forward for Dr Gonzalez, the International Relations Professor from UEV states. “Understand your options, your strengths and shortcomings, and keep in mind the limited strategies available to you, always within the broader context of great powers competition,” reiterating the last example, the meeting between Central Asian countries and the US.

Discussing the economic instability, security tensions, and climate vulnerability persisting as ongoing challenges in the South Asian neighbourhood, is it the case that global diplomacy has failed to generate sustained cooperation or effective crisis management in the region? Dr Gonzalez, being a realist, mentions that diplomacy is a tool to deploy a certain number of strategies. “Although diplomacy can be recognized as the brain of national power, it cannot resolve anything without a realist vision. It is like a novice driver driving a Ferrari — most of our leaders have shown their naivety in driving a Ferrari in a non-unipolar world where security competition is the main constraint for each of their nations.”

It is not to say that “nothing happened in 2025, far from it”, says Dr. Poast, Associate Professor at UChicago. “But there is a good chance that many of the ‘outcomes’ this year — from Trump’s tariffs to the Gaza Peace Accord — will come undone next year and, in the long term, have little impact.”
As 2025 goes down in the history books, reflecting mostly misses in diplomatic hits, how can 2026 restore authenticity and results in global diplomacy, or are any key structural reforms needed? Dr. Gonzalez from UEV expects a more profound division of the international system. “What we can expect is a deeper division of the international system into two distinct bounded orders, with actors gradually aligning themselves with one or the other, led either by China or by the United States.”

For him, the scope of global diplomacy will largely hinge on the “interactions between the two great powers. I’m not certain Russia will be able to maintain its current pace in 2026. What we can expect, however, is an escalation in deterrence.”

Looking ahead to 2026, would any new coalitions, regional blocs, or a shift in diplomatic culture close the gap between optics and outcomes? Dr. Holland, the Political Scientist from Utah, states that this is “a golden opportunity for the European Union to assume a leadership role in global diplomacy. Internal differences between the EU secretariat and authoritarian members, such as Hungary, must be confronted and overcome. Only the EU has a consistent foreign policy message, one that favors democracy, liberalism, free trade, and confronts China.”

According to dpa, the German Press Agency, the Italian President Sergio Mattarella, in a speech before the German parliament, called for stronger multilateral structures to prevent new wars. His address came during a ceremony commemorating victims of war, with flags flown at half-mast at the Reichstag building in Berlin.

Let’s see what the diplomatic theater holds in store for 2026 “Multilateralism is not bureaucracy, as autocratic rulers claim. It is the tool that defuses conflicts and makes peaceful solutions possible. It is the language of shared responsibility.”

Read More