Mark Carney’s January speech at Davos — renouncing what it described as the half-truths of the old liberal order, and explaining his government’s plans to adapt to the new era — won him much attention. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s recent op-ed in Le Monde Diplomatique can be read as a rebuttal to Carney’s position, in defence of the old regime and global institutions. Arranged together, edited snippets of each add up to a kind of debate.
1. The old rules — lies or trust?
Carney dismisses a set of rules whose results Sanchez defends.
Carney: Every morning, this shopkeeper places a sign in his window: ‘Workers of the world unite’. He doesn’t believe it, no one does, but he places a sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists.
The system’s power comes not from its truth, but from everyone’s willingness to perform as if it were true, and its fragility comes from the same source.
For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically.
This fiction was useful, and American hegemony, in particular, helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.
So, we placed the sign in the window.
This bargain no longer works.
Sánchez: Much of the social world exists only because we collectively agree that it does. A line on a map becomes a border. Words written in a treaty become binding obligations. And yes, a piece of paper becomes wealth.
These shared fictions make life in society possible. Money is one of them. So are the multilateral system and the rules of international law that organize relations between states. Yet many who would never question the first are quick to reject the second. The reason is simple: some fictions place limits on power.
Despite what some claim, the system is not failing people. For the past 75 years it has helped deliver the most prosperous and stable period in human history. This record is far from perfect — but it is far better than any alternative humanity has ever tried.
2. Global rules or à la carte deal making?
Carney cites the various arrangement Canada is attempting with individual nations or small blocs. Sanchez suggests the world needs global rules.
Carney: We are calibrating our relationships, so their depth reflects our values … We have agreed to a comprehensive strategic partnership with the EU, including joining SAFE, the European defence procurement arrangements. We have signed 12 other trade and security deals on four continents in six months. The past few days, we’ve concluded new strategic partnerships with China and Qatar. We’re negotiating free trade pacts with India, ASEAN, Thailand, Philippines and Mercosur.
To help solve global problems, we’re pursuing variable geometry, in other words, different coalitions for different issues based on common values and interests … On critical minerals, we’re forming buyers’ clubs anchored in the G7 so the world can diversify away from concentrated supply. And on AI, we’re co-operating with like-minded democracies.
This is not naive multilateralism, nor is it relying on their institutions. It’s building coalitions that work — issues by issue, with partners who share enough common ground to act together.
Sánchez: Today, we need instruments of global governance more than ever. Climate change threatens to reshape life across vast regions of the planet. Migration reflects deep global imbalances and has become a major political challenge in many societies. And the governance of artificial intelligence, together with the accelerating pace of technological change, raises new risks that ignore borders altogether.
These challenges require global co-operation. And only the multilateral system can provide that.
3. How to address Trump’s America
Carney, speaking before the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran, but after the ouster of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, speaks obliquely, pointing out a point of alignment with the rest of the west — and Trump to an extent — on Ukraine, and a disagreement with Trump’s America on Greenland. Sánchez bluntly suggests that failing to denounce rule-breaking makes the problem worse.
Carney: On Ukraine, we’re a core member of the Coalition of the Willing and one of the largest per capita contributors to its defence and security. On Arctic sovereignty, we stand firmly with Greenland and Denmark, and fully support their unique right to determine Greenland’s future.
Sánchez: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the devastating genocide perpetrated in Gaza, and the unilateral attempts by the United States to engineer regime change in Venezuela and now Iran — all without seeking even a veneer of international approval — signal that some governments are openly challenging the foundations of the international system.
The rules-based global order is also strained when political leaders, faced with these aggressions, choose silence or ambiguity instead of defending international law. In seeking to avoid confrontation, they fall into appeasement — the mistaken belief that restraint will calm those who break the rules. They believe words cannot damage the international order the way bombs do. They are wrong. When it comes to norms, words make worlds. When middle powers fail to defend global rules they accelerate their erosion. In trying to shield themselves, they end up creating the very disorder they fear.
