It is hard to best W.B. Yeats. He told us in 1920 in “The Second Coming”:
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned …
This time around, things have not just fallen apart. Our crazed king, Donald John Trump—partially demented, paranoid, and raging like an irrational two-year-old—is ripping all things apart. Perhaps it is all that extra aspirin he takes, but the large bruises on his hands point to blood thinning. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is of no help when it comes to diagnosing anything—thanks to his own brain worm. As for innocence, ever since Trump took control of the Department of Justice, it has been guilt, all day every day.
Yes, Donald John Trump has decided that this second time around, with the blessings of his knee-bent Supreme Court, he will steal as much as he can without consequence and at any price. And that includes cryptocurrency, a jet, a Nobel Peace Prize, Venezuela, possibly Gaza, and hopefully Greenland and even Canada:
Here is how The New York Times editorial board put it:
President Trump has never been a man to ask what he can do for his country. In his second term, as in his first, he is instead testing the limits of what his country can do for him.
He has poured his energy and creativity into the exploitation of the presidency — into finding out just how much money people, corporations and other nations are willing to put into his pockets in hopes of bending the power of the government to the service of their interests.
A review by the editorial board relying on analyses from news organizations shows that Mr. Trump has used the office of the presidency to make at least $1.4 billion. We know this number to be an underestimate because some of his profits remain hidden from public view. And they continue to grow.
The Trumps have made at least $23 million from licensing Mr. Trump’s name overseas since his re-election.
A hotel in Oman. An office tower in western India. A golf course on the outskirts of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. These are a few of the more than 20 overseas projects the Trump Organization is pursuing, often requiring cooperation with foreign governments. These deals have made millions for the Trumps, according to Reuters. And the administration has sometimes treated those same governments favorably. One example: The administration agreed to lower its threatened tariffs on Vietnam about a month after a Trump Organization project broke ground on a $1.5 billion golf complex outside of Hanoi. Vietnamese officials ignored their own laws to fast-track the project.
Of course, human history has taught us that there are always consequences and that when the conspirators, the beneficiaries of the corruption, and the executioners do not pay the price, the victims will. I am guessing many of us could sleep at night if all that Trump and company were doing was stealing all they could. But he is no longer rational enough, no longer in control enough to channel his immorality into greed alone. Like many a mad monarch, he is haunted by the memory of all those he’s convinced did him dirty. Enraged by those who refuse to pretend he’s sane or virtuous. Furious at those unwilling to pretend he possesses any shred of morality. And he is consumed by the need to return each imagined blow a hundred times.
I am not competent enough to pinpoint the exact nature of his psychopathology, but I have watched as Nixon decompensated before our very eyes. And I have read and seen Shakespeare and watched the deterioration of men like Macbeth, Othello, and Lear, witnessed the powerful turn sociopathic. I do not know if Trump’s mediocre sycophants like Marco Rubio, Jared Kushner, Howard Lutnick, and Stephen Miller have been whispering in his ear or whether his deteriorating brain is spurring him on. But, more and more, like Shelley’s Ozymandias, King of Kings, he seems consumed with “his works.” A royal ballroom. A triumphant arch. A 51st state that rivals all the other 50. A good portion of the world’s oil reserve. And, mostly recently, Greenland, the sparsely populated land he is convinced his rivals in Moscow and Beijing covet as much as he does.
It was Friday, January 9, 2026, when Donald Trump turned from bullying oil companies into rebuilding Venezuela’s oil infrastructure to recklessly threaten Denmark and Greenland:
The New York Times writes:
President Trump again threatened on Friday to forcibly annex Greenland, saying that he was ‘going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not.’
In a White House event discussing his plans to have American companies exploit Venezuela’s vast oil reserves under the threat of a military blockade, Mr. Trump advanced an imperialist vision of American foreign policy, where the U.S. must dominate strategically important neighboring countries because of the perceived possibility that rival powers might do so first.
‘If we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland,’ Mr. Trump said, falsely suggesting that Greenland, a semiautonomous territory of Denmark, was surrounded by Chinese and Russian warships. …
Mr. Trump delivered an ominous warning to Danish and Greenlandic officials, who have consistently opposed the president’s plans to take the island: ‘I would like to make a deal the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way we’re going to do it the hard way.’
The United States’ taking Greenland by force would rip apart the central agreement that underpins the NATO military alliance, of which Denmark and the United States are both founding members. Under that treaty, an attack on any member is treated as an attack on all members.
But Mr. Trump dismissed that central principle of the alliance as he explained why he wanted to annex Greenland, suggesting that he would defend the island only if the United States were to govern the territory directly.
‘When we own it, we defend it,’ Mr. Trump said. ‘You don’t defend leases the same way. You have to own it.’
[Emphasis added.]
Then again on January 17, 2026, Donald Trump admitted that his need to own Greenland was so critical that he would punish those who stood in his way:
The impact on Europe, as The York Times explains, was immediate:
In a single post on Saturday night, President Trump upended months of progress on trade negotiations with an ultimatum that puts Europe on a crash course with the United States — long its closest ally and suddenly one of its biggest threats.
In the Truth Social post, Mr. Trump demanded a deal to buy Greenland, saying that otherwise he would slap tariffs on a group of European nations, first 10 percent in February, then 25 percent in June.
It appeared to leave little room for Europe to maneuver or negotiate in a harsh and combative era of geopolitics. It also left Europe with few options to counter Mr. Trump without repercussions.
European leaders are loath to accept the forced takeover of an autonomous territory that is controlled by Denmark, a member of both NATO and the European Union.
Officials and outside analysts increasingly argue that Europe will need to respond to Mr. Trump with force — namely by hitting back on trade. But doing so could come at a heavy cost both to the bloc’s economy and to its security, since Europe remains heavily reliant on the United States for support through NATO and in Russia’s war with Ukraine.
‘We either fight a trade war, or we’re in a real war,’ said Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at Bruegel, a research institute in Brussels.
Europeans have spent more than a year insisting that Greenland is not for sale and have constantly repeated that the fate of the massive northern island must be decided by its people and by Denmark. Last week, a group of European nations sent personnel to Greenland for military exercises — a show of solidarity that may have triggered Mr. Trump, since the same nations are the ones to be slapped with tariffs.
The exercises were intended to reinforce Europe’s commitment to policing the Arctic.
By threatening the sovereignty of fellow NATO member Denmark and its territory of Greenland, other NATO nations felt compelled under Article 5 to make a token display of their willingness to defend Denmark and Greenland:
M. Jean-Noël Barrot, the French minister for Europe and foreign affairs, announced:
We’re showing solidarity with Denmark, since we’d like to be able to count on the support of Denmark and our European partners if we found ourselves in the same situation. And it was at Denmark’s invitation, its sovereign invitation, as the President recalled, that he decided we would take part in the Arctic Endurance exercise, to which we’re going to contribute by sending French soldiers, of whom some have arrived and others will follow – an exercise that demonstrates the Europeans’ full and complete ability to ensure their own security, and Arctic security is inseparable from Europe’s security.
The unwillingness of NATO members to immediately submit and hand Donald Trump the keys to Greenland seemed to provoke him even more:
The New York Times’ January 11, 2026, interview with President Trump offers important insight into his recent actions:
Katie Rogers
Given what has happened in Venezuela, the threats against Colombia, the discussions about taking Greenland, buying Greenland, however you’re framing this right now — is there anything that you think can constrain your power on the world stage? If it, if you believe that something is against national security?
…
Do you see any checks on your power on the world stage? Is there anything that could stop you if you wanted to?
President Trump
Yeah, there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me, and that’s very good.
Zolan Kanno-Youngs
Not international law?
President Trump
I don’t need international law. I’m not looking to hurt people. I’m not looking to kill people. I’ve ended — remember this, I’ve ended eight wars. Nobody else has ever done that. I’ve ended eight wars and didn’t get the Nobel Peace Prize. Pretty amazing. [President Barack] Obama got it. He was there for a few weeks, and he got it. He didn’t even know why he got it. …
Donald Trump’s vast greed is one thing, but the combined self-glorification and delusion is another. His cruelty and bullying, coupled with his racist hatred for all non-white immigrants, reveals to all who are watching that America has lost any claim to Ronald Reagan’s imagined “shining city on a hill.” I spent my days opposing his presidency, but what Reagan talked about, as he said goodbye to power, is exceptionally relevant today:
I’ve spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don’t know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That’s how I saw it, and see it still.
Here at home, Donald Trump has turned our Border Patrol agents into stormtroopers, smashing into homes without warrants and ripping “people of all kinds” from hardware stores, supermarkets, schools, courts, work places, and cars and trucks. Now, he has inflicted this cruelty and mayhem upon the rest of the world. He has sent our troops to abduct a Venezuelan leader for tolerating the drug trade while simultaneously pardoning a convicted Honduran leader in the pocket of the cartels. With the aid of an American military force trained to obey his orders, he is bullying our neighbors and our allies and turning a good portion of the world against us. So get used to hearing “Yankee, Go Home!”
More from The New York Times:
Katie Rogers
… If you had to choose between obtaining Greenland and preserving NATO, what’s your higher priority there?
President Trump
Well, I don’t want to say that to you, but it may be a choice. You have to understand. Russia is not at all concerned with NATO other than us. China is not at all concerned with NATO other than us, because, sadly, you know, Europe is becoming a much different place, and they really do have to shape up. I want them to shape up.
…
Tyler Pager
Are you prepared to send troops to Greenland if they do not give over the territory?
President Trump
Well, we already have troops —
Tyler Pager
But more troops to militarily take it over.
President Trump
Sure, I’d have more.
Tyler Pager
Would you take it over with the military?
President Trump
I mean, don’t forget, we have, you know, a good section of troops. And I’ve had troops there, and I’ve upped it. We already have troops in Greenland.
…
David E. Sanger:
… In the 1951 agreement, though, it says the United States can reopen these bases anytime you want. You can send as many troops as you want.
President Trump
That’s right.
David E. Sanger
And you haven’t done it. How come?
President Trump
Because I want to do it properly.
David E. Sanger
And properly means own it?
President Trump
Really it is, to me, it’s ownership. Ownership is very important.
David E. Sanger
Why is ownership important here?
President Trump
Because that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success. I think that ownership gives you a thing that you can’t do, whether you’re talking about a lease or a treaty. Ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document, that you can have a base.
…
Katie Rogers
Psychologically important to you or to the United States?
President Trump
Psychologically important for me. Now, maybe another president would feel differently, but so far I’ve been right about everything.
Tyler Pager
And you would use military force to get that?
President Trump
I didn’t say that. You said that.
Tyler Pager
I’m asking you. Would you?
President Trump
Yeah, I wouldn’t comment on that. I don’t think it’ll be necessary.
David E. Sanger
I asked you a year ago, you may remember, at Mar-a-Lago, before your inauguration, you said, If I need to use nuclear force, if I need to use military force —
President Trump
It’s possible, if I needed it. It might upset NATO. Look, we spend a lot of money on NATO. You know a lot of people don’t think NATO is to our benefit.
Donald Trump’s psychological need is one thing; the wishes of the people of Greenland are quite another:
The New York Times notes:
Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen of Greenland said on Tuesday that his country would rather remain a part of the Danish Kingdom than join the United States, a day before officials from the three governments are set to meet at the White House.
President Trump has been insistent that he would try to take over Greenland ‘whether they like it or not.’ Denmark colonized the island more than 300 years ago and still controls some of its affairs.
‘If we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark,’ Mr. Nielsen said in a joint news conference with Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen of Denmark. ‘We choose NATO, the Kingdom of Denmark and the European Union.’
‘The time has come to stand together,’ he added from Ms. Frederiksen’s office in Copenhagen. ‘Greenland does not want to be governed by the United States. Greenland does not want to be part of the United States.’
Greenland was incorporated into Denmark in 1953. In 1979 Greenland gained limited autonomy over internal matters and established its own Parliament.
In 2009, Greenland gained self-rule and gained the right to hold a referendum on independence but have not done so.
Greenland relies on Denmark for economic subsidies, protection from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and many professional services such as education and medicine.
There seems to be no end to Donald Trump’s ability to miscalculate, to bully and bluster and turn friends to foes. The problem is that he has turned into a monumental embarrassment, and no one around him has the guts to do anything but encourage him to even greater acts of madness. His Truth Social post prior to his departure to Davos warned us of what was to come:
From my jaded point of view, there have been breaking points galore along the way: his repeated decision to side with Putin over Ukraine or his wanton disregard for international law as he blows boats out of the water without proof of guilt. But for our allies, it is his decision to follow up his theft of Venezuelan oil with the threats to seize Greenland, even Canada. To obliterate NATO in the process, the treaty our allies signed to provide joint protection from their superpower enemies. And the problem is that King Trump, as his first-term military advisors told us, knows nothing of history. So imagine how galling it must have been for the leaders of Europe, of Denmark in particular, of France and the United Kingdom and Canada, to listen to him at Davos re-write their shared experience, to obliterate their accomplishments.
He began by diminishing them and insisting on American superiority:
This afternoon, I want to discuss how we have achieved this economic miracle, how we intend to raise living standards for our citizens to levels never seen before, and perhaps how you too and the places where you come from could do much better by following what we’re doing because certain places in Europe are not even recognizable, frankly, anymore. They’re not recognizable. And we can argue about it, but there’s no argument. Friends come back from different places — I don’t want to insult anybody — and say, ‘I don’t recognize it.’ And that’s not in a positive way. That’s in a very negative way. And I love Europe, and I want to see Europe go good. But it’s not heading in the right direction.
Donald Trump seems not to know what the George Bush Center proudly proclaims about NATO:
The alliance’s commitment to Article 5 – NATO’s collective defense agreement that means an attack against one shall be considered an attack against all – is the core of NATO’s existence, evolution, and unparalleled strength. The only time it has been triggered was after Sept. 11, 2001, when NATO aircraft were deployed to help protect U.S airspace after al-Qaida terrorists murdered thousands of Americans in New York City, in the crash in Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon in Washington.
Time and again, Donald Trump embarrasses us all by stupidly denying reality:
The United States is treated very unfairly by NATO, I want to tell you that. When you think about it, nobody can dispute it. We give so much and we get so little in return … You wouldn’t have NATO if I didn’t get involved in my first term … Until I came along, NATO was only supposed to pay 2% of GDP, but they weren’t paying. Most of the countries weren’t paying anything. The United States was paying for virtually 100% of NATO. And I got that stopped. I said, ‘That’s not fair.’ But then, more importantly, I got NATO to pay 5% … And they’re stronger for it … We never asked for anything and we never got anything. We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t to do that. OK, now everyone’s saying, oh, good. That’s probably the biggest statement I made because people thought I would use force. I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force …
As Daniel Dale of CNN points out:
Trump also claimed that, ‘until I came along,’ the US ‘was paying for virtually 100% of NATO,’ adding, ‘We paid for, in my opinion, 100% of NATO.’ Trump’s ‘opinion’ is factually inaccurate. NATO figures show that, in 2024, US defense spending made up about 63% of total NATO defense spending; in 2016, the year before Trump took office the first time, it was about 72%. Both figures are big, of course, but nowhere near the 100% figure he has used for years.
And the US contributes a smaller percentage to NATO’s own organizational budget. Under an agreed formula, the US provided about 16% of that budget at the time Trump returned to office in 2025. When he took office in 2017, the US was contributing about 22% of the budget.
Trump also said that, despite a NATO target of each member spending 2% of gross domestic product on defense, ‘most of the countries weren’t paying anything’ until he came along … While it’s true that many members were slow to hit the 2% target, a majority of them were meeting it in 2024, NATO figures show, with 18 of the 31 members subject to the target at or above 2%.
In 2016, four NATO members were hitting the target; in 2020, the last year of Trump’s first term, it was eight members.
Trump’s claim that he has pressured countries to up that percentage to five percent is a significant exaggeration. In fact, as the World Population Review reveals, the United States is paying a smaller percentage of GDP than Poland and Estonia, and not close to five percent:
Donald Trump’s lies about NATO and his pathetic misunderstanding of Article 5 have led him to believe that NATO owes something to America—but mostly him. And that is Greenland:
All the United States is asking for is a place called Greenland where we already had it as a trustee, but respectfully returned it back to Denmark not long ago after we defeated the Germans, the Japanese, the Italians and others in World War Two. We gave it back to them. We were a powerful force then, but we are a much more powerful force now … So what we have gotten out of NATO is nothing except to protect Europe from the Soviet Union and now Russia. I mean, we’ve helped them for so many years. We’ve never gotten anything except we pay for NATO and we’ve paid for many years until I came along … And all we’re asking for is to get Greenland, including right title and ownership, because you need the ownership to defend it …
But now what I’m asking for is a piece of ice, cold and poorly located, that can play a vital role in world peace and world protection. It’s a very small ask compared to what we have given them for many, many decades. But the problem with NATO is that we’ll be there for them 100 percent. But I’m not sure that they’d be there for us if we gave them the call, ‘Gentlemen, we are being attacked, we’re under attack by such and such a nation.’ I know them all very well. I’m not sure that they’d be there. I know we’d be there for them. I don’t know that they’d be there for us. So with all of the money we expend, with all of the blood, sweat and tears, I don’t know that they’d be there for us. They’re not there for us on Iceland, I can tell you.
In the end, Donald Trump did what he always does—he tried to bully Denmark:
So we want a piece of ice for world protection. And they won’t give it. We’ve never asked for anything else. And we could have kept that piece of land, and we didn’t. So they have a choice. You can say yes, and we will be very appreciative. Or you can say no, and we will remember …
Of course, Donald Trump knows as little about Greenland—which he constantly confuses with Iceland—as he does about NATO. Just for the record, the United States made a deal with Denmark in 1916, buying the Dutch West Indies for $25 million dollars and at the same time acknowledging Denmark’s interests in Greenland:
Back to Daniel Dale’s Factcheck for CNN:
He repeatedly referred to Greenland as ‘a piece of ice,’ saying at one point, ‘What I’m asking for is a piece of ice, cold and poorly located, that can play a vital role in world peace and world protection.’ He also said, ‘It’s hard to call it land.’ While Greenland is icy, it is no mere piece of ice; it is a vast land mass where more than 56,000 people live. Trump made no mention of the local population, which is overwhelmingly opposed to a US takeover … Greenland was never a US possession to give ‘back.’ The 1941 agreement that allowed the US military to operate in Greenland explicitly said that Denmark retained sovereignty over the territory. The agreement said, ‘The Government of the United States of America reiterates its recognition of and respect for the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark over Greenland … The Kingdom of Denmark retains sovereignty over the defense areas mentioned in the preceding articles.’ …
At another point in the speech, Trump said ‘there’s no sign of Denmark there.’ The Danish military presence in Greenland has long been small, but it existed long before Trump’s push to take over the territory – and Denmark has stepped up that presence in recent weeks.
[Emphasis added.]
Donald Trump may not recognize Denmark’s sovereignty, but our allies do:
I don’t know about you, but I am profoundly embarrassed by how our president appeared before the rest of the world. We have grown jaded, used to his inappropriateness, his boorish treatment of those members of the press who won’t kowtow to his repeated exaggerations and outright lies, his ugly attempts to diminish his rivals. But it seems so much worse when he is out spewing his ignorant nonsense to the larger world.
President Trump has insulted too many leaders and nations and nationalities for me to apologize to them all. But what is clear is that while he may not appreciate the price to be paid for his demented insults and uncalled for threats, we undoubtedly will pay for those transgressions. Because they won’t come here in the numbers they came before. Because they won’t welcome us the way they once did. And, as we have already seen with the price of coffee, the world will gladly find other nations to trade with. And despite his oft-repeated lies, the cost of every tariff will inevitably be passed onto us. More and more things we rely on will cost us more.
I don’t know if you watched, but Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney gave a speech that offered truth and demolished illusion:
In 1978, the Czech dissident Václav Havel, later president, wrote an essay called ‘The Power of the Powerless,’ and in it he asked a simple question: how did the communist system sustain itself?
And his answer began with a greengrocer.
Every morning, the shopkeeper places a sign in his window: ‘Workers of the world unite.’ He doesn’t believe in it. No one does. But he places the sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists — not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.
“Havel called this living within a lie. 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. When even one person stops performing, when the greengrocer removes his sign, the illusion begins to crack.
Friends, it is time for companies and countries to take their signs down.
For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We join its institutions, we praised its principles, we benefited from its predictability. And because of that, we could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.
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, and we knew that international law applied with varied rigor, depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.
…
“So we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals, and we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality.
This bargain no longer works.
Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.
Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration. But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons, tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.
You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.
The multilateral institutions on which the middle powers have relied — the WTO, the UN, the COP, the very architecture of collective problem solving — are under threat. As a result, many countries are drawing the same conclusions that they must develop greater strategic autonomy in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance and supply chains. And this impulse is understandable.
A country that cannot feed itself, fuel itself, or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself.
But let’s be clear-eyed about where this leads. A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile, and less sustainable. …
The question for middle powers like Canada is not whether to adapt to the new reality — we must.
The question is whether we adapt by simply building higher walls, or whether we can do something more ambitious.
…
Or, to put it another way, we aim to be both principled and pragmatic. Principled in our commitment to fundamental values, sovereignty, territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter and respect for human rights.
And pragmatic in recognizing that progress is often incremental, that interests diverge, that not every partner will share all of our values.
…
We’ve 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.
In 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.
We’re doing something else: to help solve global problems, we’re pursuing variable geometry. In other words, different coalitions for different issues based on common values and interests. So 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.
Our commitment to NATO’s Article 5 is unwavering, so we’re working with our NATO allies, including the Nordic-Baltic Eight, to further secure the alliance’s northern and western flanks, including through Canada’s unprecedented investments in over-the-horizon radar, in submarines, in aircraft, and boots on the ground — boots on the ice.
Canada strongly opposes tariffs over Greenland and calls for focused talks to achieve our shared objectives of security and prosperity in the Arctic.
On plurilateral trade, we’re championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific partnership and the European Union, which would create a new trading bloc of 1.5 billion people.
…
Our view is the middle powers must act together because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu.
…
Which brings me back to Havel. What does it mean for middle powers to live the truth?
First, it means naming reality. Stop invoking rules-based international order as though it still functions as advertised. Call it what it is: a system of intensifying great power rivalry where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as coercion.
It means acting consistently, applying the same standards to allies and rivals. When middle powers criticize economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent when it comes from another, we are keeping the sign in the window.
It means building what we claim to believe in, rather than waiting for the old order to be restored. It means creating institutions and agreements that function as described, and it means reducing the leverage that enables coercion.
That’s building a strong domestic economy. It should be every government’s immediate priority.
And diversification internationally is not just economic prudence; it’s a material foundation for honest foreign policy, because countries earn the right to principled stands by reducing their vulnerability to retaliation.
So, Canada. Canada has what the world wants. We are an energy superpower. We hold vast reserves of critical minerals. We have the most educated population in the world. Our pension funds are amongst the world’s largest and most sophisticated investors. In other words, we have capital talent. We also have a government with immense fiscal capacity to act decisively. And we have the values to which many others aspire.
Canada is a pluralistic society that works. Our public square is loud, diverse and free. Canadians remain committed to sustainability. We are a stable and reliable partner in a world that is anything but, a partner that builds and values relationships for the long term.
And we have something else: we have a recognition of what’s happening and determination to act accordingly. We understand that this rupture calls for more than adaptation. It calls for honesty about the world as it is.
We are taking a sign out of the window.
We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn’t mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy, but we believe that from the fracture we can build something bigger, better, stronger, more just. This is the task of the middle powers, the countries that have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and the most to gain from genuine cooperation.
[Emphasis added.]
So it was that our neighbor to the north—the nation Donald Trump makes fun of, disparages, continually suggests depends on us—offered the world a lesson in truth-telling rather than the lies that constantly poured out of the mouth of our president. And so it was that Canada appeared to many as the new shining city on the hill.
As for us here at home, it is time to listen to Lars Christensen from Copenhagen, Denmark:
In the meantime, we are stuck with a president whose dementia seems to worsen by the day, who listens to a gaggle of remarkably stupid sycophants. They seem to encourage rather than censure his grandiose delusions. Not one of them intervened as he rambled and ranted at Davos and managed to offend just about everyone. And when it finally became apparent that almost no one was ready to give in to his blackmail, he and the NATO secretary scrambled to invent a face-saving exit, a supposed framework with absolutely no details:
Unfortunately, for the moment, we are stuck with a crazy king, one on his way out. And as Donald contemplates his waning powers, surrounded by the power-hungry servants he has spawned, each of them now licking their lips as they imagine succeeding him, who can possibly know what he might do?
I am guessing Greenland still remains the prize he is focused on. I have a feeling if he is watching from above, Woody Guthrie has already made some changes to his anthem. Because for Denmark and Greenland and much of the rest of the world, the song they are now singing is “This Land Is Their Land.” Let’s pray they prevail.
