The Illusion of Exclusivity in International Commitments

An opinion piece argues that a nation's reliability in international cooperation is not determined by the number of treaties it signs or memberships it holds, but by its actual adherence to commitments. The author contends that the opposite of commitment is breach, not multiplicity, and that the number of institutions a country joins reveals little about its trustworthiness. The piece highlights that while multiple memberships can become meaningless—when governments sign declarations for diplomatic display, free-ride, make contradictory promises, or leak confidential information—the key distinction lies between obligation-based exclusivity and identity-based exclusivity. The argument extends beyond AI, as fragmented international institutions increasingly demand that governments prove commitment by excluding others, a seductive yet dangerous approach to cooperation. The article emphasizes that a single alliance can still harbor free-riders, while participation in several organizations can be responsible and loyal. Published on SCMP's opinion section, the piece critiques the logic that equates exclusivity with commitment, urging a focus on actual behavior rather than institutional affiliations.