Multilateralism
Rather than going it alone or going it with others, the administration opted for intensive one-on-one relationships with handpicked countries that maximized the U.S. capacity to achieve its objectives.
Another challenge in global governance through multilateralism involves national sovereignty. Regardless of the erosion of nation-states' legal and operational sovereignty in international relations, "nation-states remain the ultimate locus of authoritative decision making regarding most facets of public and private life". Hoffman asserted that nation-states are "unlikely to embrace abstract obligations that clash with concrete calculations of national interest."
Global multilateralism is challenged, particularly with respect to trade, by regional arrangements such as the European Union and NAFTA, although these are not in themselves incompatible with larger accords. The original sponsor of post-war multilateralism in economic regimes, the United States, turned towards unilateral action and in trade and other negotiations as a result of dissatisfaction with the outcomes of multilateral fora. As the most powerful nation, the United States had the least to lose from abandoning multilateralism; the weakest nations have the most to lose, but the cost for all would be high.  Aside from changes in the US, populism in Europe has proven to be problematic to multilateralism in recent years.  Results from direct elections to the European Parliament give evidence to this claim, as Eurosceptic parties have made advances.

Comparison with bilateralism: When enacting foreign policies, governments face a choice between unilateralism, bilateralism and multilateralism.
Bilateralism means coordination with another single country. Multilateralism has attempted to find common ground based on generalized principles of conduct, in addition to details associated with a particular agreement. Victor Cha argued that: power asymmetries predict the type of structures, bilateral or multilateral, that offer the most control. If small powers try to control a larger one, then multilateralism is effective. But if great powers seek control over smaller ones, bilateral alliances are more effective.

Thus, a country's decision to select bilateralism or multilateralism when enacting foreign policies is greatly affected by its size and power, as well as the size and power of the country over which it seeks to control. Take the example of Foreign Policy of the United States. Many references discuss how the United States interacts with other nations. In particular, the United States chose multilateralism in Europe and decided to form NATO, while it formed bilateral alliances, or the Hub and spokes architecture, in East Asia. Although there are many arguments about the reasons for this, Cha's "powerplay" theory provides one possible reason. He argued: ...postwar U.S planners had to contend with a region uniquely constituted of potential rogue allies, through their aggressive behaviour, could potentially entrap the United States in an unwanted wider war in Asia... To avoid this outcome, the United States created a series of tight, deep bilateral alliances with Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan through which it could exercise maximum control and prevent unilateral aggression. Furthermore, it did not seek to make these bilateral alliances multilateral, because it wanted to amplify U.S. control and minimize any collusion among its partners.

See also: 

Notes: 

Further reading: Kim Fontaine-Skronski, Valériane Thool & Norbert Eschborn, Does the UN Model Still Work? Challenges and Prospects for the Future of Multilateralism, Brill, 2023, ISBN 978-90-04-51648-9
Kathryn C. Lavelle, The Challenges of Multilateralism (New Haven:  Yale University Press, 2020). ISBN 9780300230451
Nicola Contessi, "Multilateralism" in Joel Krieger (ed.) Oxford Companion to International Relations (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2014), pp. 96–101.
Edward Newman, Ramesh Rhakur and John Tirman, Multilateralism Under Challenge (Tokyo: United Nations Press, 2006).
Michale Yahuda, The International Politics of the Asia-Pacific (New York: Routledge, 2011)
Rorden Wilkinson, Multilateralism and the World Trade Organisation: The Architecture and Extension of International Trade Regulation (New York: Routledge, 2000).
Claude, Inis L. (1984). Swords into plowshares : the problems and progress of international organization. Random House. ISBN 0394340531. OCLC 246372664.