Leadership, in its truest sense, emerges not just in times of triumph but in moments of global uncertainty and doubt. Recent remarks by Carney at Davos have reignited a debate that is not only relevant to the future of foreign policy but also to the very fabric of international cooperation and legitimacy. His evocative phrase, “If we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu,” echoes throughout the corridors of power, a stark reminder that absence from decision-making isn’t neutrality—it’s vulnerability.
This simple yet profound observation underpins a broader narrative about the choices facing the West and, indeed, the world. Carney’s vision, couched in an appeal to legitimacy, integrity, and the rule of law, offers a counterpoint to the more muscular, often unilateral approach favoured by some global leaders. It is, at its heart, a plea for collective action—a belief that the international order is most resilient when it is built on consensus rather than coercion.
Contrast this with the bombast and bravado shown by President Trump, who, speaking on the same stage, shifted between threats and grand promises. His insistence on “right, title and ownership” of Greenland, though accompanied by humour, reveals a worldview driven more by transactionalism and personal gain than by genuine partnership. The strongman politics often on display — rhetoric filled with self-aggrandisement and dismissive of dissent — seems at odds with the more subtle, inclusive forms of statesmanship that have sometimes characterised the post-war era.
For many observers, the contrast could not be starker. On one side, the call to wield power together, responsibly and with an eye to the greater good. On the other hand, an approach that frames international relations as a zero-sum game, where lifting one nation means dragging others down. This dichotomy forces us to consider what kind of leadership the world needs as it faces a host of shared challenges, from climate change and economic instability to pandemics and mass migration.
There is, of course, a seductive quality to the rhetoric of exceptionalism. History is replete with leaders who have galvanised their nations with appeals to strength, uniqueness, and destiny. But such narratives, if left unchallenged, risk undermining the very systems that have delivered peace and prosperity for decades. As Carney suggests, the power of legitimacy and integrity will endure only if we choose to wield them together. In other words, the enduring strength of the international system comes not from the raw exercise of power, but from a shared commitment to rules and norms.
But what does this mean in practice? For smaller nations—and for those who feel marginalised by the shifting tides of geopolitics—the answer may lie in forging alliances, building coalitions, and insisting on their place at the table. The alternative is to be perpetually on the menu, subject to the whims of larger actors who see the world as a chessboard rather than a community. Only through engagement, however imperfect, can smaller voices hope to influence the direction of global affairs.
It is also worth considering the limits of strongman politics. Despite their theatricality, threats and insults rarely translate into sustainable victories. The lessons of history are clear: coercion may yield short-term compliance, but it breeds resentment and instability in the long run. By contrast, genuine leadership—rooted in dialogue, respect, and a willingness to compromise—creates the conditions for lasting peace and progress.
This is not to say that the rules-based order is without its faults. There are legitimate grievances about how power is distributed, whose interests are served, and who is left behind. But abandoning the system altogether in favour of naked self-interest is not a recipe for a better world. The challenge is to reform, not reject; to strengthen, not subvert. Carney’s call to wield legitimacy and integrity together is a reminder that leadership is as much about vision as it is about power.
From an Irish perspective—and indeed from the standpoint of any small or medium-sized nation—the stakes could hardly be higher. The choices made at summits like Davos have real-world implications: for trade, for security, for the environment. Being at the table is not a luxury; it’s a necessity. And while no system is perfect, exclusion is invariably worse. The task for leaders is not just to look after their own interests, but to ensure that the table is big enough for all who have a stake in the outcome.
As the United States and other major powers wrestle with the meaning of their own exceptionalism, the rest of the world must find ways to assert its agency and protect its interests. This will require courage, creativity, and, above all, collaboration. The future of international relations depends not on the triumph of one vision over another, but on the ability to reconcile ambition with responsibility, and strength with solidarity.
Ultimately, the measure of leadership is not how loudly one can speak, but how well one can listen—and how wisely one can act in the face of uncertainty. As Carney donned the cloak of statesmanship at Davos, he offered a path forward that is both challenging and hopeful. The world would do well to heed his call, not only for the sake of legitimacy and integrity, but for the promise of a more just and secure international order.
Source of Inspiration : One venue, two speeches – how Mark Carney left Donald Trump in the dust in Davos
Jesmond Saliba, Founder of ThinkPeople.EU is a strategic communications expert and thought leader in governance, ethics, and international relations. With extensive experience advising organisations on reputation management, policy engagement, and global diplomacy, Jesmond champions transparency, accountability, and multilateral cooperation as pillars of effective leadership. Known for insightful commentary on ethical governance and strategic influence, Jesmond regularly contributes to discussions on global stability and responsible leadership.He is also Malta’s Commissioner for the Voluntary, Charity and Non-Profit Sector.
