THE column headline, in case you have not noticed, screams “see the contrast.” I will go to that later.
The most awe-inspiring political and leadership evolution of the 21st century is without argument that of Mark Carney’s, the current prime minister of Canada. From a bland central banker who seemed to be more comfortable with tracking monetary data than interacting with people, Carney first edged out former journalist Chrystia Freeland for the leadership of Canada’s Liberal Party in the post-Justin Trudeau era, then the Liberals beat the conservatives, led by a Trump-lite leader, to win in the parliamentary elections.
The win was hailed as something close to a miracle. The Canadian conservatives led the Liberals by wide, supposedly insurmountable margins in all polling, years before the parliamentary elections. Political analysts said the win snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, saving in the process the struggling, apocalypse-destined Liberal Party.
In normal times and sans ruptures to the global order, Carney was expected to do what the standard-issue Liberal Party prime minister does when in office, which is to nurture the progressive and liberal values favored by Liberals, tweak the immigration policies to moderate the influx of immigrants to rein in the housing shortage and somehow placate the demand of conservatives, and steer Canada even closer to the community of nations that share its core beliefs. And for economic reasons, deepen its economic integration with its North American neighbors: the US and Mexico.
As the Bard wrote, all the well-laid plans often go awry. Enter US President Donald Trump, the “Tariff Man” who is also in a zealous pursuit of old-fashioned imperialism. Claiming without evidence that Mexico and Canada had been the source of drugs and fentanyl moving into the US to harm Americans, Trump’s first tariff impositions early last year targeted Canada and Mexico, the US’ partners in the USMCA.
Then Trump floated the idea of annexing Canada as the 51st state of the US, mocked Carney as “Governor Carney,” the governor of a newly annexed state. The release of the Trump administration’s National Security Statement (NSS) outlined the US national security priorities and that included the US intent to carve up the world into spheres of influence, with the US focused on dominating the “Western hemisphere.” That same document warned Europe of “civilizational erasure” unless it stops the flow of immigrants from non-white nations. Trump threatened to take over Greenland, through force, if necessary.
Last Jan. 20, in a speech before the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Carney received a standing ovation for forcefully rebuking Trump, the first Western leader to do so. He told the Davos crowd that the chaos caused by Trump are not a transitory setback on global comity but constituted a permanent “rupture” that those believing in the international global order should counter. He asked the “middle powers” to move away from the US “hegemon.”
Today, Canada is finding new trading partners, including trade deals with China. He has aligned the defense and national security programs of Canada with the European Union and is deftly navigating the economic dislocations caused by Trump’s reckless policies through strategic partnerships with other nations. A formidable intellect and savvy in economic troubleshooting come in handy in defining the future of his country in a chaotic global order upended by Trump.
What Carney has shown to the world is that an intellectually gifted, autocracy-hating, democracy-loving leader likewise committed to global comity and free trade is what most democracies need at this moment. A leader just as committed to fighting global bullies intent on domination. In the Philippine context, the straightforward lesson we can learn is that we should be more demanding about our choice for president in 2028. We need someone like Carney, not the opposite, not the leadership represented by Trump or the Trump-like president we had from 2016 to 2022, Rodrigo Duterte, now on trial at The Hauge for crimes against humanity.
As we raise the qualifications of the next Philippine president to exacting, Carney-level standards, as we elevate our expectations — competence and gravitas and intellect — of the next president, our default position on the announced presidential run of Vice President Sara Duterte, the Duterte princeling, should be to send one simple message. At this critical point in the history of the nation, Sara Duterte is not the one we need. Maybe during stable times, maybe when the institutions of democracy are less vulnerable, maybe during a time there is instant remedy for leaders who are either reckless or incompetent.
Not now, Ma’am, and we promise to build you a monument if you call off your presidential run.
I am sure there are people like me who daydream of the next president as rising to a certain level of greatness. Like, for example, a leader of a nation invited to address an important global forum in the midst of a global rupture caused by trade protectionism, the resurgence of old-fashioned imperialism, the shattering of a century-old global order based on shared values.
That great president would start by quoting Thucydides to remind the world of Athenian hubris, commit his or her nation to uphold the challenged values of the challenged international order, then lay down the strategy to ward off the recklessness, cruelty and cynicism of the powerful thugs out to upend the system.
That’s a task for leaders like Mark Carney, not Sara Duterte. And even with the kind of politics we have, which is often dazzled by the Dutertes’ cynicism, let us shake off our worst instincts and opt/vote for greatness.