Every day we are made aware that we live in an era of rivalry of large powers, that rules-based order breaks down that stronger ones can do what they want and the weak must endure as much as they must. This aphorism of Tukidides is portrayed as inevitable, as the natural logic of global relations, which confirms itself. In the face of this logic, states have a strong tendency to submit, to get along, to avoid trouble, hoping that obedience will guarantee their safety. Well, no. So what are our options?
In 1978, Czech dissident Václav Havel,
The later president wrote an essay entitled “Powerless Powers”, in which he asked a simple question: how did the communist strategy survive? And his answer starts with a vegetable seller.
Every morning the shopkeeper places a sign in the window: “Proletarians of all countries, connect”. He doesn't believe it. No 1 believes. But he's putting up a sign to avoid trouble, signal submission to get along. And since all shopkeeper on all street does the same thing, the strategy continues – not only due to violence, but besides due to the participation of average people in rituals that they privately know are false. Havel called it a lie life. The power of the strategy comes not from its truth, but from the readiness of everyone to act as if it were true. And his fragility has the same source. erstwhile at least 1 individual stops working, erstwhile 1 vegetable merchant takes off the sign, the illusion begins to crack. Friends, it's time for companies and states to take down their signs. For decades, countries like Canada have prospered under what we called a principled global order. We joined his institution, praised his principles, utilized his predictability. This allowed us to conduct a abroad policy based on values under his protection. We knew that the communicative of an global rule-based order was partially false, that the strongest were exempt from the work to comply with the rules, erstwhile it was convenient for them, that commercial rules were enforced asymmetrically, and that global law applied with varying severity depending on the identity of the accused or the victim. This fiction was useful, and American hegemony in peculiar contributed to the provision of public goods, open maritime routes, a unchangeable financial system, collective safety and support for the dispute resolution framework.
So we put a sign in the window.
We participated in rituals and mostly avoided paying attention to differences between rhetoric and reality. This deal is no longer in force. Let me get this straight. We're in the mediate of a breakthrough, not a transformation.
Over the last 2 decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy and geopolitics have exposed the risks of utmost global integration. However, late the powers have begun to usage economical integration as weapons, customs as a tool of pressure, financial infrastructure as a tool of coercion, and supply chains as gaps that can be used.
You cannot live in a lie about the common benefits of integration, since integration becomes the origin of your submission.
Institutions based on medium-sized countries – WTO [World Trade Organisation], UN, COP [climate conference] and the architecture of collective problem solving itself – are at risk. As a result, many countries come to the same conclusion that they request to make greater strategical autonomy in energy, food, key minerals, finance and supply chains. And that impulse is understandable.
A country that is incapable to feed itself, to supply fuel or to defend itself has small opportunity. erstwhile the rules halt protecting you, you gotta defend yourself. But let's be realistic and see where it leads. The planet of “fortress” will be poorer, more fragile and little balanced.
There is 1 more truth: if the large powers abandon even the appearance of principles and values for the unlimited pursuit of power and performance of their interests, the benefits of transactionism will become more hard to repeat.
Hegemons can't coin their relation forever. Allies will diversify their actions to defend themselves from uncertainty. They will buy out insurance, increase the number of options to rebuild sovereignty – sovereignty that utilized to be based on principles, but will be increasingly rooted in the ability to defy pressure.
It's known to be classical hazard management. hazard management has its price, but the cost of strategical autonomy, sovereignty, can be divided. Joint investment in resilience is cheaper than building your own "fortress". Common standards reduce fragmentation. Complementarity is simply a affirmative sum.
The question for medium-sized powers specified as Canada is not whether to adapt to the fresh reality – we gotta do so. The question is whether we will adapt, simply building higher walls, or whether we can do something more ambitious. Canada was 1 of the first countries to hear the informing signal, which prompted us to fundamentally change our strategical attitude. The Canadians know that our old, convenient presumption that geographical location and affiliation to alliances automatically supply us with prosperity and safety is no longer up to date. Our fresh approach is based on what Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, called realism based on values.
In another words, we strive to be both honest and pragmatic. We follow the principles of our commitment to fundamental values, sovereignty, territorial integrity, the prohibition of force, but in cases compatible with the United Nations Charter, and respect for human rights. And we pragmatically recognise that advancement is frequently made gradually, that interests are diverging, that not all partner will share all our values.
So we engage widely, strategically, with open eyes. We actively accept the planet as it is and not wait for the planet as we would like to be. We calibrate our relationships so that their depth reflects our values. A precedence is the broad commitment to maximise our impact, given the current volatility of the world, its risks and the rate of what will happen. And we no longer trust only on the strength of our values, but besides on the value of our strength. We build this power in the country. Since my government became involved, we've reduced taxes on income, capital gains and business investment. We have removed all national barriers to inter-provincial trade. We are speeding up $1 trillion worth of investment in energy, artificial intelligence, key minerals, fresh trade corridors and another areas. We are doubling our defence spending by the end of this decade and we are doing so in a way that strengthens our home industry. And we rapidly diversify our operations abroad. We have agreed on a comprehensive strategical partnership with the European Union, including the accession to SAFE, the European Defence Procurement Agreement. In six months we have signed 12 another trade and safety agreements on 4 continents. In the last fewer days, we have established fresh strategical partnerships with China and Qatar. We are negotiating free trade agreements with India, ASEAN, Thailand, the Philippines and Mercosur. We do something else: to aid solve global problems, we usage variable geometry. In another words, different coalitions for different issues, based on common values and interests. As far as Ukraine is concerned, we are a key associate of the Volunteer Coalition and 1 of the largest contributors per capita to its defence and security. On the issue of the sovereignty of the Arctic, we powerfully support Greenland and Denmark, and we full support their unique right to decide on the future of Greenland. Our commitment to complying with Article 5 of NATO is unwavering, so we work with our NATO allies, including the Nordic-Baltic Eight, to further safe the northern and western flanks of the alliance, including through unprecedented Canadian investments in non-horizontal radars, submarines, aircraft and land forces.
Canada powerfully opposes Greenland duties and calls for talks to be held to accomplish common objectives on safety and prosperity in the Arctic. On the issue of multilateral trade, we are in favour of measures to build a bridge between the Transpacific Partnership and the European Union, which would lead to the creation of a fresh commercial block of 1.5 billion people, dealing with key minerals.
We make clubs rooted in G7,
so the planet can diversify its activities by giving up the concentration of supply. And in the substance of artificial intelligence (AI), we work with akin reasoning democracies to guarantee that we are yet not forced to choose between hegemons and hyperscalists. This is not naive multilateralism or reliance on their institutions. It's building coalitions that work in all aspect with partners who have adequate in common to work together. In any cases this will apply to the vast majority of countries. This creates a dense network of links in trade, investment and culture that we can draw from to face future challenges and opportunities.
We believe that medium-sized countries must act together, due to the fact that if we are not at the table, then we are on the menu. I would besides say that the large powers can now afford to act alone. They have the size of the market, military possible and the strength of force to dictate conditions. average countries are not. erstwhile we negociate only bilaterally with hegemon, we negociate from the position of weakness. We accept what is offered. We compete with each another to be as yielding as possible. It's not sovereign. It is the realization of sovereignty while accepting submission.
In a planet of rivalry of large powers, countries between them have a choice: to compete for consideration or to join forces to make a third, effective path. We should not let the increase in hard force to obscure the fact that the strength of legitimacy, integrity and principles will stay strong if we decide to usage it together.
It all brings me back to Havel. What does it mean that the mediate Powers live the truth? First of all, it means naming reality. halt citing rules-based global order as if it inactive function according to how it is advertised. Call it by name: a strategy of increasing rival powers in which the most powerful prosecute their interests, utilizing economical integration as a coercion. This means consistent action, applying the same standards to allies and rivals. erstwhile medium-sized countries criticize economical intimidation on the 1 hand and stay silent erstwhile it comes on the other, we leave [described by Havel] a sign in the window. This means building what we believe, according to declarations, alternatively of waiting for the old order to be restored.
This means creating institutions and agreements that act as described, and this means limiting the force of force that allows coercion. It's building a strong national economy. This should be the precedence of any government. Diversification in the global arena is not only economical discretion; it is simply a material foundation of fair abroad policy, as countries gain the right to take up rules-based positions, reducing their vulnerability to retaliation.
Canada has what the planet wants.
We are an energy superpower. We have immense reserves of key minerals. We have the most educated population in the world. Our pension funds are among the largest and most experienced investors in the world. In another words, we have talented investors. We besides have a government with immense fiscal capacity to act decisively. And we have values to which many others aspire.
Canada is simply a pluralistic and functioning society. Our public space is loud, diverse and free. Canadians are constantly striving for sustainable development. We are a unchangeable and reliable partner for the world, a partner who builds and values long-term relationships.
And we have something else: we are aware of what is happening, and determined to act in accordance with it. We realize that a global fracture requires more than just adaptation. It requires integrity to the planet as it is. We take the sign out of the window.
We know that the old order will not return. We shouldn't mourn him. Nostalgia is not a strategy, but we believe that from a crack we can build something bigger, better, stronger and fairer. This is the task of middle-level powers – the countries that have the most to lose in the planet "fortress" and the most to gain through genuine cooperation.
Great powers have their power. But we besides have something: the ability to halt pretending, call reality, build our strength at home and act together. This is Canada's way. We choose it openly and confidently, It's an open road for any country that wants to follow with us.