Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney took to the stage on January 20 at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, urging his counterparts to reevaluate the rapidly evolving geopolitical climate. His speech served as an attempt to ignite a communal awakening amongst the global middle powers, of which Canada is a crucial part. Carney opened with the assertion that there is a “rupture” occurring in the landscape of world politics, as hegemonic powers go unchecked in their attempts to fulfill their own self-interest. Though he never explicitly named the US as the subject in question, the criticisms to follow were undoubtedly pointed towards the current American administration. Carney’s speech came at a crucial point in the geopolitical landscape with nations around the world questioning the motives driving American political decisions. The speech made Canada’s stance clear, and invited other nations to join them in their plans for creating a future that they align with.
The crux of the speech challenged the perceived inevitability that “the weak suffer what they must” in wake of political decisions coming from powerful autonomous nations. He went on in great detail to describe what could be summed up as “political bullying” with the manipulation of economics to force compliance and alignment with hegemonic incentives. After stating his case that this threat needed to be addressed, the call to action followed: Carney’s suggests that the problem stems from complacency and a “herd mentality.” People, beyond the realm of politics but certainly in it as well, tend to take all possible measures to avoid voicing an opinion that ostracizes them from “the pack.” The effects of this phenomenon are most prevalent at times of large-scale cooperation, making it a tool for compliance despite the inevitable occurrence of ideological differences.
Carney proposed a new “middle powers alliance” that would not undermine NATO or other global institutions, rather work alongside them. He positioned Canada as a leader in the initiative, which could be a positive choice due to its domestic wealth of resources, vast economic global ties, and track record for peacekeeping and collaborative problem solving. He presented Canada as a nation that “has what others want” in terms of resources, giving the nation a unique advantage despite not having a ranking highly in terms of the global power hierarchy.
Carney stated that the utmost priority for the middle powers in the current state of the world is to develop self-sufficient domestic economies, as it would be ineffective to limit compliance with the preferences of major powers while relying on their resources. This sentiment was demonstrated by news of a potential US annexation of Greenland around the same time as the annual meeting in Davos. This was alluded to in the speech when Carney asserted Canada’s unwavering commitment to NATO’s Article 5, in favor of collective defense. Denmark’s claim to the territory made President Trump’s potential plan appear to be an encroachment on Article 5, while no plans for violent armed attack were validated.
The question for Carney and Canada now considers how changes they have proclaimed will be undertaken. The speech touched on various economic victories the country has and hopes to see under Carney’s leadership, including tax cuts and a plan to double military spending by 2030. He humbly asked middle power nations to consider leaving behind the notion that complacency is the best strategy. He stated definitively that Canada was open to working with anyone willing to work with them, and that collaborative discussions were what he hoped to produce through this process.
Parts of the speech could be interpreted as references to recent discussions of collaboration with China. As another major global power that rivals the US in several crucial categories, a rise in Chinese influence may serve to rival US sway in global affairs. Just days before delivering his speech, Carney agreed to a partnership with the Asian nation to collaborate on a range of pressing topics including energy, technology, and environmental policy. In opening the invitation for collaboration to any nation willing to work with Canada, the attempt to create a global force opposing the US is brought into question.
Carney’s speech, although inspired and heartfelt, could be critiqued as lacking tangible plan and playing to emotions rather than establishing next steps. The pointedness of the speech to paint the US in a negative light may have been a bold choice for the current stage of development in the Canadian plan, but nonetheless many people felt that the call to action was necessary in light of recent events.
President Trump delivered his own speech the same night at the World Economic forum, and dedicated some of his time to respond to Carney’s clear condemnation of the dominant power’s recent decisions. Trump viewed the Canadian Prime Minister’s speech as a form of disrespect, and noted that many US policies do, whether directly or indirectly, benefit Canada. The US constitutes around 65 percent of NATO’s total defense funding, and based solely off of location, Canada receives protection benefits simply by proximity to the hegemon.
All things considered, Carney will need a concrete plan to move forward with his agenda and enough countries to also speak out against US policy in order to initiate change. While the attempt is somewhat of a gamble due to the sheer size and decision making power of the US, real changes have the potential to alter the geopolitical framework as it is recognized today.
Edited by Noe Beaudoin
Disclaimer: This is an article written by a Staff Writer. Catalyst is a student-led platform that fosters engagement with global issues from a learning perspective. The opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect the views of the publication.
