If there was any doubt, the overthrow of Venezuela and now threats to annex Greenland have put the new world order on full display. It’s a new world where power is always right and international law is merely academic. There is no global cop, only hemispheric ones, as the US National Security Strategy forewarned at the end of 2025. The stakes are colossal as this new order increases the scope for conflict and economic disruption. Mark Carney, Canada’s prime minister, has proposed a response to this geopolitical upheaval — a middle-power strategy — that he outlined in his recent Davos speech. The bottom line is that the dust has not firmly settled on a new global order, and a broad range of very different scenarios is still plausible. So, how could things play out next?
Several scenarios, and, of course, black swans, could be tough for Canada, but let’s focus on the one that aligns with the prime minister’s vision — an ascending middle-power scenario. His starting point is an imperative to stop economic weaponization by the superpowers, since this creates subservience and uncertainty for the prosperity and security of countries like Canada. Indeed, the facts point to a growing reflex of the two superpowers to pursue coercive economic strategies on tariffs (for example, steel, aluminum and canola); financial infrastructure (for example, digital currencies); and supply chains (for example, autos, lumber and critical minerals).
These are the realities that Canada and other countries face, and the current system seems utterly powerless to stop them or the tit-for-tat retaliation that follows. If international institutions like the World Trade Organization are toothless and the superpowers choose their own rules, something had to give, and middle powers need to take collective action to protect themselves.
It’s a multilateral world without a new rulebook or guardrails. The full “rupture” — as the prime minister called it — from the past rules-based international order is fresh, and some countries and leaders are still in denial. But in the new way of the world, the largest powers appear free to impose their will — unfettered — through military, trade or other means.
Countries around the world are now scrambling to find a way forward that works best to position their national interests. Middle powers can be defined to include most of the world’s largest and dynamic economies, including countries as diverse as Australia, Brazil, Egypt, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia, as well as smaller, influential countries like Norway, Singapore, Switzerland and the United Arab Emirates. So, many of the more powerful countries find themselves in a similar position to Canada — although most not as deeply or urgently so — despite very different geographies and other circumstances.
The boldest part of the prime minister’s speech was to explicitly call for other middle powers to join Canada’s lead in developing a “third path” — something that Canadian think tanks and academics have regularly proposed. And this path included comments that the old international order had failed to uphold its own principles consistently and fairly in all regions, and that the new order must be steadfast in applying these principles. This will be music to the ears of many in the “Global South,” who have been arguing this case for decades. It will also mean that Carney’s proposal is taken more seriously by some countries but perhaps be seen as too idealistic by others.
Concretely, the plan would mean that middle-power countries develop their own core sovereign capabilities — not just in staples like food and energy — but also in key data, financial, intellectual property and security infrastructures so vital in the digital age. It’s a plan to build reliable supply chains between middle powers and use collective leverage to negotiate fair deals with otherwise overbearing superpowers. And partnerships could extend to bridging existing plurilateral arrangements between multiple middle powers like the Trans-Pacific Partnership to other groupings like the European Union, which would create a huge trading area and set of rules without either China or the United States included.
Two big black swans include highly acute climate change impacts and unchecked artificial superintelligence.
At a time when defence spending is increasing in most North Atlantic Treaty Organization countries, procurement arrangements and other forms of cooperation offer scope to ramp up massively. There is also an opportunity and necessity for middle powers to assert their capabilities and standards into new technologies in the realms of artificial intelligence, quantum, digital currencies, outer space and cyber to ensure against the loss of sovereign autonomy and gain their share of the economic and productivity benefits. But there are big questions about how middle powers could leverage newfound power in some critical areas, including in new governance models like US President Donald Trump’s proposed Board of Peace, which appears to be not just about rebuilding Gaza but also a potential replacement for the United Nations Security Council, which he would chair, with significant agenda-setting power and the ability to break tie votes.
As things stand, the middle-power scenario is probably the most favourable one for Canada and for many others, but it is far from the only one. Some form of a basically interoperable economic/security bloc-based system or a dysfunctional fragmented order could take hold. A grand bargain between China and the United States is not impossible, nor is full disorder and global conflict. And, of course, there are many potential black swans — developments that we know are very possible, but whose timing and scope are too uncertain to get significant contingencies in our current economic frameworks.
Two big black swans include highly acute climate change impacts and unchecked artificial superintelligence. As examples, if either of those futures arrive in force, the trajectory of global order will fundamentally shift. This means countries should drive to make the system they want the reality, while being prepared to manage different scenarios and even surprises.
Ottawa policy makers, and surely some in other capitals, are now busy figuring out how to move forward on Carney’s middle-power strategy. It will be important to see which other countries sign up for the plan or at least make warm gestures about the speech and working with Canada. Building a critical mass of support and action will be imperative. Trump’s speech in Davos softened the tone on using military force in Greenland, but the aggressiveness of “America First” remains. It is not surprising he was silent on Carney’s speech, but many hawkish advisers surely took notice. This was evidenced by his message to Carney in the press conference that followed, flippantly asserting that Canada only “lives” because of the United States and to watch his words. More words and actions will follow soon as countries seek to define themselves and their objectives in the new global order. Whatever the outcome, it will be an intense ride.
