How the world might stand up to Donald Trump

The opinion argues the recent Greenland episode and Davos debate have weakened NATO’s credibility and contends middle powers should deepen trade and security cooperation with like-minded partners.

The piece examines recent diplomatic tensions tied to the Greenland episode and the wider reaction at Davos. It reports an apparent U.S.-NATO understanding on Greenland that the article describes as vague and beyond the negotiators' mandates. The author argues these developments have eroded confidence in the rules-based international order and weakened NATO's standing. The Davos speech by Mark Carney is presented as a focal moment prompting middle powers to reassess trade and security ties. Key points: - The article reports a proposed understanding between the U.S. president and NATO's secretary-general over Greenland that is described as unclear, lacking a clear mandate, and appearing to ratify the status quo. - It says these events have, in the author's view, undermined the legitimacy of U.S. leadership within the rules-based international order and damaged NATO's credibility. - The piece outlines proposals for middle powers to deepen trade with like-minded partners and to explore new security coalitions, mentioning ideas such as a Democratic League and coordinated economic responses. - Next steps by governments or formal procedures are not specified and are undetermined at this time. Summary: The article contends that recent U.S.-linked diplomatic moves have shaken postwar assumptions about alliance reliability and that middle powers are being urged to build alternative trade and security networks. It highlights implications for countries such as Canada, noting questions about trade exposure and the need for economic and defence capacity. Undetermined at this time.