As the author of “Delivering Diplomacy: The Universal Postal Union as a Post-Westphalian Construct” in the publication celebrating our Union’s 150th anniversary, I reflected on the UPU as not only a historical construct, but as a practical international framework that supports cross-border interoperability and efficiency in postal operations. Central was the concept of “technical multilateralism,” a functionalist approach to international relations that prioritizes the creation of standardized and non-political protocols that allow the global postal model to function in an interoperable manner regardless of geopolitical frictions. This article seeks to expand our understanding of that concept.
While traditional bodies in the UN system (like the Security Council) often reflect political, economic and ideological power dynamics, technical multilateral bodies such as the UPU focus on the invisible “plumbing” of the global order that requires continual and seamless movement. Such bodies have a specialized mandate and rely on expert-driven and rules-based frameworks. This technocratic modus operandi contrasts with more conventional forms of political multilateralism that focus on broader political or ideological interests. In a philosophical sense, technical multilateralism is a form of international cooperation focused less on what nations believe, and more on how they interact in pursuit of shared goals.The creation of the UPU by the 1874 the Treaty of Berne happened against the backdrop of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia and emergence of the modern state system. In a world comprised of sovereign states with defined and defended borders, the founders of our Postal Union prioritized operational rather than territorial integration, thereby making it less threatening to national sovereignty at a time when great powers were rising and falling, and the colonial world order was at an inflection point. By focusing on the emerging Union’s operational mandate, collective transaction costs in moving documents and goods across the globe were lowered, common standards removed friction points, and costs associated with collection, transport and delivery were settled efficiently.
The UPU’s founding principles of freedom of transit, non-discrimination, uniform postal regulations and establishment of a centralized International Bureau challenged the prevailing norms of international relations. Over its 152 years it has grown from 21 to 192 members, and is responsible for the introduction of standardized tools such as the S10 barcode, electronic advance data, international mail processing centres, the terminal dues remuneration system, Integrated Product, Remuneration, and Quality Plans, etc. As we think about the UPU’s future in this golden age of e-commerce, its role is in areas such as evolving customs and entry regimes; creating more efficient linehaul solutions; building AI tools to ingest mass electronic data to identify security risks; enabling predictive tracking; and so forth. If the designated postal operator is to succeed in a new and fiercely competitive landscape, the global postal network must also become the backbone of a trusted omnichannel communication infrastructure that participates in non-traditional postal activities such as financial services and digitization authentication.
As a political scientist by training, I find the UPU’s technocratic focus its most defining feature, and one that I find compelling. But this is no accident or coincidence. From its earliest days, the Union prioritized the role of postal experts over diplomats. In 1863, the Postmaster General of the United States’ postal service Montgomery Blair convened a conference in Paris, inviting postal experts – rather than professional diplomats – from 15 countries to exchange views. That conference and the 1874 Berne Congress were not mere diplomatic gatherings; they were spaces for technical specialists to design a model for international cooperation through standard-setting and emphasis on efficient movement of goods through a shared network. We owe the architects of our Union a debt of gratitude for decoupling the “how” from the “why”, and in 2026 if we continue to “stick to our lane” we will succeed moving forward.
As a head of delegation to multiple Congresses and meetings of the Council of Administration and Postal Operations Council, I have noted that most issues considered in our Union fall within a uniquely postal remit and generally steer clear of ideology, thereby avoiding Max Weber’s description of politics as the “strong and slow boring of hard wood”. Of course, none of the preceding is to suggest that the UPU does not face existential pressures. Technical multilateralism is far from a static set of rules; it is a living, breathing negotiation between its members that is tested daily in the minutiae of our industry. But I am optimistic for the future, and encouraged at how willing Union members have been in responding to issues such as the United States’ notice of withdrawal, wholesale reforms to the terminal dues system, the COVID-19 global pandemic, introduction of the European Union’s Import Control System Release 2 (which mandates pre-arrival electronic data for postal items going to and through the EU), suspension of the United States’ de minimis exemption, and deleterious postal volume erosion into commercial channels.
Technical multilateralism as exemplified by the UPU represents one of the most durable, resilient and successful forms of international cooperation. While other bodies and political unions may be subject to fracture owing to normative or qualitative differences, the UPU’s focus on its core mandate gives it singular focus. As nations (and groups of nations that govern themselves collectively through pooled sovereignty constructs) demand more control over their own borders and tax regimes, technocrat-led multilateral bodies allow nations to enforce their specific laws, thereby enhancing rather than diluting their sovereignty. And it is worth noting that nations keep these channels open not out of friendship, but because the cost of being disconnected is often too high to pay.
It is here that the supposed tension between national sovereignty and global connectivity is rendered illusory. Indeed, we can achieve both, provided that our Union is sufficiently resilient to manage inevitable complexities. This leveraging of technical multilateralism can be seen in other UN bodies, such as the International Telecommunication Union, World Health Organization, International Civil Aviation Organization or World Customs Organization, which focus on their own scope-delimited mandates rather than broader geopolitics. In the case of our Union, the ability to maintain postal flows under nearly all circumstances also underscores its humanitarian and pacific role.
Looking to the future, I believe that the UPU must continue operating as a specialized, technical body and invisible bridge that keeps postal items moving throughout the world. It is the “Rosetta Stone” that allows 192 designated postal operators to speak one logistical language so that a letter or package can navigate a complex labyrinth of international borders between any two points on the globe. Technical multilateralism is not some ethereal or anachronistic concept, but rather a blueprint for our future. As we move towards a new world order and era of increased geopolitical competition, the quiet, expert-driven work of the UPU will remain an essential architecture of global inclusion and connectivity, and beacon of hope for effective multilateral cooperation.