Whether it was at a recent foreign policy conference in Ottawa organized by the Canadian International Council, or at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, the consensus was remarkably similar: The world is in the midst of great change. The challenge is to figure out what combination of countries can deal with the big global issues as the United States is no longer the hyperpower, but no other country can fill its shoes to lead.
At the Ottawa conference—The World in 2015: Implications for Canada—the 300 registrants were focused on what role Canada might play in a world of accelerating change, with an eclectic group of speakers outlining the shifts in power and status now underway.
At the World Economic Forum, business executives and politicians debated the future structure of global governance, global financial regulation, and the impact of new players, led by China. Prime Minister Stephen Harper was among them.
In Ottawa and Davos, it was accepted that the old North Atlantic world of the United States, Canada and Western Europe has lost its once unquestioned ability to set the global agenda. The new world order must include the new emerging powers, notably China, India, Brazil and Russia, and be prepared for the rise of even newer players such as Indonesia, South Africa, Vietnam and Turkey.
As Ramesh Thakur, director of the Balsillie School on International Affairs (a partnership between the University of Waterloo, Wilfrid Laurier University and the Centre for International Governance Innovation), told the gathering, there is a new world order evolving.
"Westerners have lost the capacity to set standards and rules of behaviour for the world. Until they acknowledge this reality, there is little prospect of making significant progress in deadlocked international negotiations," he said, arguing that "the G20 offers the best crossover point between legitimacy, efficiency and effectiveness to steer policy consensus and co-ordination while navigating the shifting global currents of power, wealth and influence."
While the United States remains essential to any significant international action plan, for the first time China is also essential for success in dealing with global economics, climate change, trade policy or international security. At the CIC conference, while there was strong recognition that Canada had to look beyond North America, there was also profound concern that the US get its house in order once again. A weak US is not in Canada's interest.
The shift in economic power is already happening. When he chaired the US Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan was seen as central banker for the world, effectively setting global monetary policy. But as recent events show, China can also set the trend in global monetary policy, as it did recently in a tightening move that quickly sent ripple effects through stock markets around the world. Increasingly, it is Chinese demand that sets global commodity and energy prices while China has become the largest creditor for the US.
A major concern, raised in both Ottawa and Davos, is the growing dysfunctional nature of the US political system and the inability to achieve political consensus on key issues, from fiscal adjustment and trade policy to climate change and health care. Canada's former ambassador to the US, Michael Wilson, called the intense political division in the US "very troublesome," underlining that this "makes it very difficult to come to conclusions."
The question, in Ottawa and Davos, was how much of a role can we expect the US to play given its domestic problems, and what new approaches will be needed in a multipolar world.
David Malone, Canada's former high commissioner to India and now president of the International Development Research Council, warned that the new players are no longer looking to the West as the model, but to countries such as China, Brazil and India.
Moreover, he said, new clubs are emerging which Canada will never belong to, so we have to find new ways to hear what they are saying. One example is the Shanghai Co-operation Organization, which includes China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, with India, Iran, Pakistan and Mongolia as observers.
The former director of the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service, Jim Judd, noted that foreign policy is not just about diplomacy or military power, important though these are. It is also about ideas, such as Canada's role in the land mines treaty and the responsibility to protect. There is also the role of people, with Canadians serving in key institutions. The CIC conference could have also examined the foreign role of the private sector, including corporations and non-governmental organizations.
Paul Heinbecker, Canada's former ambassador to the United Nations, warned that Canada is losing its ability to advance its interests in the multipolar world and to perform useful and indeed essential diplomacy due to a serious underfunding of Canadian missions abroad. Canada is cutting back when it should be expanding.
But he expressed optimism about Canada's potential to play a more effective world role. Canada is a successful society, he argued, and has the national assets and the capacity to act in helping structure a better world. It is not a small country in population or the size of its economy. It also has the talent and it has the money.
What Canada lacks is a vision of what we should do and how to make it happen, a view that seemed to be shared by many in his audience. The delegates at Davos, it would seem, came to a similar conclusion at the global level.