Globalism and Sovereigntism in Multilateral International Negotiations (a Case of the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime)

Introduction. As the cybercrime issue spreads globally, in the light of conflict dynamics between leading powers, states increasingly disagree on issues such as democracy, human rights, security, national interests, etc. The UN Convention against Cybercrime, initiated by Russia and signed in October 2025, is the first example of a global normative framework for information security. The purpose of this study is to identify mechanisms for achieving compromise in global cybercrime regulation, despite the opposing positions of the UN member states representing both liberal globalist and sovereigntist approaches.
Methods and Materials. In the first stage, thematic coding of the transcripts of opening statements by UN member states was conducted. In the second stage, the text of the draft Convention was coded, followed by a search for markers specific to liberal globalism and sovereigntism, based on expert assessments by six faculty members of St. Petersburg State University. The objective was to determine whether certain key concepts relate to liberal globalism or sovereigntism. In the third stage, the texts of the discussions on the proposed amendments were examined.
Results. The study revealed that during the discussions, no state joined the group of countries representing the opposite approach. Despite this, the normative ambiguity, by allowing for a broad interpretation of the document's provisions, helped avoid a clash of irreconcilable positions. The study also confirmed that influential actors tend to be much more visible and leave a greater discursive footprint, while countries whose radical positions lack significant international support often advocate for significant changes.
Discussion and Conclusion. The approach proposed in this article can be adapted to various international negotiation situations to understand how states overcome differences and reach compromises.