51
Carney’s mega anti-Trump alliance starts quest to save world trade
(www.politico.eu)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
51 points (93.2% liked)
Canada
11793 readers
468 users here now
What's going on Canada?
Related Communities
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
- Alberta
- British Columbia
- Manitoba
- New Brunswick
- Newfoundland and Labrador
- Northwest Territories
- Nova Scotia
- Nunavut
- Ontario
- Prince Edward Island
- Quebec
- Saskatchewan
- Yukon
🏙️ Cities / Local Communities
- Anmore (BC)
- Burnaby (BC)
- Calgary (AB)
- Comox Valley (BC)
- Edmonton (AB)
- East Gwillimbury (ON)
- Greater Sudbury (ON)
- Guelph (ON)
- Halifax (NS)
- Hamilton (ON)
- Kingston (ON)
- Kootenays (BC)
- London (ON)
- Mississauga (ON)
- Montreal (QC)
- Nanaimo (BC)
- Niagara Falls (ON)
- Niagara-on-the-Lake (ON)
- Oceanside (BC)
- Ottawa (ON)
- Port Alberni (BC)
- Regina (SK)
- Sarnia (ON)
- Saskatoon (SK)
- Squamish (BC)
- Thunder Bay (ON)
- Toronto (ON)
- Vancouver (BC)
- Vancouver Island (BC)
- Victoria (BC)
- Waterloo (ON)
- Whistler (BC)
- Windsor (ON)
- Winnipeg (MB)
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
🏒 Sports
Baseball
Basketball
Curling
Hockey
- Main: c/Hockey
- Calgary Flames
- Edmonton Oilers
- Montréal Canadiens
- Ottawa Senators
- Toronto Maple Leafs
- Vancouver Canucks
- Winnipeg Jets
Soccer
- Main: /c/CanadaSoccer
- Toronto FC
💻 Schools / Universities
- BC | UBC (U of British Columbia)
- BC | SFU (Simon Fraser U)
- BC | VIU (Vancouver Island U)
- BC | TWU (Trinity Western U)
- ON | UofT (U of Toronto)
- ON | UWO (U of Western Ontario)
- ON | UWaterloo (U of Waterloo)
- ON | UofG (U of Guelph)
- ON | OTU (Ontario Tech U)
- QC | McGill (McGill U)
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales
- Personal Finance Canada
- Buy Canadian
- BAPCSalesCanada
- Canadian Investor
- Canadian Skincare
- Churning Canada
- Quebec Finance
- Canada Grown Business
🗣️ Politics
- General:
- Federal Parties (alphabetical):
- By Province (alphabetical):
🍁 Social / Culture
- Ask a Canadian
- Bières Québec
- Canada Francais
- Canadian Gaming
- EhVideos (Canadian video media)
- First Nations
- First Nations Languages
- Indigenous
- Inuit
- Logiciels libres au Québec
- Maple Music (music)
Rules
- Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
The combined CPTPP-EU may be 40 countries, but combine for less than 13% of the world population, nearly all from the Global North. What kind of alliance is this to pose as having say over world trade law?
Also, look across the countries in the CPTPP and the EU that have deep security, economic or leadership dependence on the US.
Meanwhile, countries like China and India, with 35% of the world's population, aren't even included.
China is building its own axis with China at its center, with ambition to rival and take over from the US as the world's only super power. India is in the BRIC block very friendly with Russia, led by a right wing Hindu nationalist party. They got their own blocks.
I don't have any issue with CPTPP-EU working on trade law for the CPTPP-EU as a bloc. It's the framing of this group as fit to set world trade law I'm taking issue with.
I think you're missing the tenet of the intent. China is building a China-centric trading eco system. They want what US has. The rest of the world subsidizing them while they control the world trade and financial system. This new block is trying to be counter-weight in negotiating a better WTO against China and the US. The picture you're missing is that the post-WWII order established by non-communist countries are geared to favor the US and the West. But now that US is breaking the old understanding where that advantage was shared with junior partners, they are finding themselves at a disadvantage. That's why Carney is smartly trying to organize the junior partners of US to form a block, to not only revive WTO, but to create a better one.
I'm not missing that. My point is contextualizing the group as they try to push for reform, or potentially move to build a new order. It makes sense for them to do, but in the context of the history of the WTO/GATT and Bretton Woods institutions and why we've reached this breakdown, it's important to recognize what the group is: a contingent of Global North countries representing a very small percentage of the world population and with ongoing high levels of dependence on the US.
This is more about middle powers versus hegemons and hyperscalers. We don't have the leverage as individual nations on our own, an alliance of middle powers does when it comes to international trade and security negotiation.
when talking about world trade the size of ones population does not matter as much as i.e. the GDP because those are the relevant numbers when judging a economic topic.
Do you agree that laws governing finance should just be determined by those with the biggest investments? How about laws of war just being determined by those with the biggest armies? Or, market laws just determined by those with the highest revenues and valuations?
The two countries I mentioned that combine for 35% of the world's population are also the world's number 1 and number 3 largest economies. This group actually leaves out the top 4 and 6 of the top 10.
It has fundamental legitimacy problems when it comes to setting world trade law.
Everyone commenting on stuff like this seems to be philosophically disposed to some kind of monolith.
The whole point of a multilateral realignment means that a bunch of rules will be remade, some by this group and some by that group.
Are you referring to people quoted in the article, or people posting here? It's definitely in the article, but I'm not sure I see that from the posts here.