English
Davos 2026: The Rupture Declaration
At the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2026, a coalition of leaders from Canada, the European Union, Qatar, Singapore, Morocco, and Finland delivered a stark message: the old rules-based international order is permanently broken. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney declared, 'We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition,' arguing that the fiction of a universal liberal order has been exposed. Rather than mourning its passing, middle powers are redefining sovereignty as resilience—building strategic autonomy in supply chains, defense, energy, and technology through flexible, variable-geometry coalitions. This article analyzes how systemically important second-tier states are forming new blocs, hedging between the US and China, and reshaping global governance from the middle out.
The Carney Doctrine: Values-Based Realism
Mark Carney's Davos speech introduced what analysts now call the 'Carney Doctrine'—a foreign policy framework blending liberal democratic values with pragmatic realism. In a paper published through the North American and Arctic Defence and Security Network on January 21, 2026, Carney outlined 'values-based realism' as a middle-power strategy that merges principled commitment to human rights and territorial integrity with hard-nosed strategic engagement. The Carney Doctrine middle powers approach rejects both naive multilateralism and isolationist fortress-building, advocating instead for collective investments in resilience and shared standards.
Variable Geometry Diplomacy
Central to Carney's vision is 'variable geometry'—forming different coalitions based on shared interests rather than relying on weakened universal institutions. Instead of waiting for the WTO to reform, Carney proposed connecting the EU with the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), creating a 1.5 billion-person trade bloc without American participation. Sector-specific agreements on critical minerals, dual-use technologies, and clean energy are being negotiated separately, allowing middle powers to hedge between US and China without being forced to choose sides entirely.
The Mosaic Order: ETH Zurich's Strategic Trends 2026
Concurrent with the Davos meetings, the ETH Zurich Center for Security Studies released its 16th edition of Strategic Trends (March 2026), identifying the emergence of a 'mosaic order'—overlapping regional and transregional arrangements where major powers compete for influence. The report highlights three regional responses: defiant regionalism (e.g., ASEAN asserting autonomy), instrumentalised regionalism (e.g., Africa leveraged by external powers), and fluid regionalism (e.g., Latin America shifting alliances). Middle powers, particularly in Southeast Asia, are recalibrating strategies to preserve autonomy between Washington and Beijing, while cross-theatre cooperation is gaining traction globally.
From Sovereignty to Resilience
The ETH Zurich analysis notes that middle powers are reframing sovereignty as resilience and capacity-building rather than territorial withdrawal. This manifests in several domains:
- Supply chains: Diversifying critical mineral sourcing away from Chinese dominance, which controls 90% of rare-earth processing. The EU's Critical Raw Materials Act sets 2030 targets, while Canada and Australia have launched bilateral agreements on lithium and cobalt.
- Defense: Canada doubled its defense spending and signed 12 new trade and security agreements since Carney took office. Finland, now a NATO member, is deepening Nordic defense cooperation.
- Energy: Qatar and Morocco are investing in renewable energy corridors, while Singapore positions itself as a green finance hub.
- Technology: The Australia-Canada-India Technology and Innovation Partnership (ACITI) exemplifies sector-specific minilateralism focused on semiconductors and AI.
Coalition-Building in Practice
The Davos 2026 middle-power summit showcased concrete initiatives. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen urged Europe to recognize permanent change and build a new independent Europe. Moroccan PM Aziz Akhannouch emphasized protecting society first through social resilience programs. Singapore's leaders highlighted the need for middle powers strategic autonomy in digital infrastructure and financial systems. Qatar leveraged its energy wealth to fund connectivity projects linking Asia, Africa, and Europe.
These efforts are not without critics. In Foreign Affairs, Michael Beckley warned of 'The Middle Power Delusion,' arguing that hedging strategies will fail as US-China rivalry intensifies. Both Washington and Beijing are increasingly pressuring states to pick sides through tariffs, technology restrictions, and military threats. Beckley contends that the middle ground is becoming a 'minefield rather than a marketplace,' urging middle powers to choose alignment with the great power offering the best protection.
Impact on Global Governance
The shift toward variable-geometry coalitions is already reshaping global governance. Traditional multilateral institutions like the UN and WTO are being bypassed in favor of minilateral arrangements that can move faster and address specific challenges. The fragmented global order 2026 is producing both opportunities and risks: middle powers can exert disproportionate influence in niche areas, but the lack of universal frameworks may exacerbate inequality and instability.
Carnegie Endowment's Stewart Patrick, writing in January 2026, argues that middle powers are poised to play a crucial role in reviving international cooperation—but cautions against unrealistic optimism. Middle powers are a diverse group with competing interests, and their effectiveness depends on finding common objectives while navigating domestic populist politics.
Expert Perspectives
Michael Kovrig, writing in Foreign Policy, describes the Carney Doctrine as a 'strategic emancipation proclamation' for middle powers, but notes that authoritarian regimes like Russia and China can learn to colonize these networks. The further middle powers distance themselves from the US, the greater their strategic risks become in an increasingly bipolar world.
At the Gulf Research Center, analysts highlight that middle powers from the Global South—including Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil—are pursuing their own versions of strategic autonomy, often with different priorities than their Northern counterparts. This North-South divergence remains a key challenge for any unified middle-power agenda.
FAQ
What is a middle power in 2026?
A middle power is a systemically important second-tier state that exerts influence through diplomatic capability, economic strength, and niche expertise rather than military might. Examples include Canada, Australia, South Korea, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and EU member states.
What is variable geometry diplomacy?
Variable geometry refers to forming different coalitions based on shared interests in specific domains (trade, security, technology) rather than relying on universal multilateral institutions. It allows middle powers to cooperate flexibly without being forced into rigid alliances.
Why did Mark Carney declare the old order broken?
Carney argued that the US-led rules-based order has permanently ruptured due to great power rivalry, US withdrawal from global leadership, and the exposure of the system's fictions. He urged middle powers to stop pretending the old system will return and instead build new frameworks.
What is the mosaic order?
Identified by ETH Zurich's Strategic Trends 2026, the mosaic order describes a world of overlapping regional and transregional arrangements where major powers compete for influence, and middle powers navigate between them through flexible coalitions.
Can middle powers succeed in reshaping global order?
Opinions are divided. Optimists point to middle powers' diplomatic skills and economic heft; pessimists warn that superpower pressure will force them to choose sides. Success likely depends on their ability to form resilient, value-aligned coalitions while managing internal and external tensions.
Conclusion
The middle-power pivot represents a structural shift in international relations. Rather than waiting for a return to the past, second-tier states are actively architecting a fragmented global system. Whether this leads to a more resilient, cooperative world order or a chaotic mosaic of competing blocs remains to be seen. What is clear is that the era of middle powers as passive bystanders is over.
Follow Discussion