History has repeatedly shown that being isolated or overly dependent on another nation puts a country in a vulnerable position. That vulnerability can seem to be a non-issue for years, even decades, but it becomes impossible to ignore when the one country a nation depends on undergoes rapid change.
Canada has faced the need to simultaneously rearm and reorient some of our trade away from the U.S. amid tariffs and the questioning of Canadian sovereignty. A WSJ report reveals the U.S. President spoke of scrapping the treaty clarifying the border between Canada and the U.S. and said, “I tear that up, and your whole country unravels,” while speaking to former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Clearly, overt dependence on a country currently led by an individual issuing such threats, even if the border would have remained in place due to earlier treaties, is untenable.
Addressing such a challenge while also dealing with internal disunity and without allies abroad would be nearly impossible, especially for a country like Canada that has a ways to go before it reaches the population and internal economic scale that could reduce (though not ever eliminate) the need for deep alliances.
Such large-scale changes make demands of the populace, and the buy-in necessary for those changes to win broad support and last can only come with the extension of goodwill to people across the political spectrum.
Thus, this situation creates the necessity for a ‘broad-tent’ leadership style based upon the principle of openness: Openness to people from different political parties, and an openness to forging strong trade and defence relationships outside of Canada. This is what Canada has seen so far from the leadership style of Mark Carney, who has brought new MPs into the government from both the NDP and Conservative benches, recently appointed a Conservative MP to the Senate, and has reduced tensions between the Federal Government and the Alberta Provincial Government. Carney has also deepened Canada’s economic and military ties to the European Union, signed a drone deal with Ukraine that shows how good faith actions (supporting Ukraine’s fight for survival) bring tangible benefits (better drone production capabilities in Canada and better protection for the members of the Canadian Armed Forces), and has sought to balance real tensions with large economies like India and China with the benefits of trade.
Critics are right to point to the risk that such an open posture can lead to being unwilling to be firm about anything. A leader who can find common ground with everyone could be a leader who stands on no solid ground themselves. However, that concern can be countered by considering Canada’s staunch and ongoing support for Ukraine, Carney’s commitment to defending the territorial integrity of Denmark and Greenland, and his refusal to take a poor trade deal from the U.S. for the politically expedient route of saying he ‘got a deal.’ All of this indicates that a principled core remains.
Taken as a whole, Carney has prioritized growing the tent both at home and abroad. At a time when Canada needs internal unity and needs to build a broader base of friends and allies abroad, Carney’s leadership style is proving to be a good fit for the times Canada finds itself in.
Spencer Fernando
If this piece left you clearer than it found you, that's the point. I write for readers who want to think past the week, to see the longer pattern beneath the daily story, and to come away steadier rather than more agitated.
That longer view gets built somewhere. On Patreon, essay by essay, I'm constructing The Long Work, a body of analysis meant to outlast the news cycle that prompted it. The readers there make it possible. No subsidies, no strings. The work answers to them.
$8/month to read it as it's built, and to have a hand in building it.