Pratica di Shadowing: Special Address by Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada | World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2026 - Impara a parlare inglese con i video

Mark, should I read yours?

Hi, everyone.

It's a great honor for me to introduce Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada, along with Gideon Rockman from the Financial Times.

Much of the dialogue over the next few days will focus on where the puck is going.

You like that, Mark?

Okay.

Where the puck is going next in the global economy,

which makes this a fitting moment to introduce a former hockey player, the Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney.

The ability to remain calm in fast-moving, high-pressure moments has defined Mark's career.

In 2008, he led the Bank of Canada

and helped steer his economy through the worst market turmoil in all our lives and our generation.

In the aftermath of Brexit,

he became the first non-Brit to serve as a governor of the Bank of England. And last year,

he was elected very deservingly as Prime Minister for Canada at

what may be one of the most pivotal moments in modern Canadian history.

Today, Prime Minister Carney is focused on making Canada a place where it's easier to build,

simpler to trade, smarter to invest in, and build more unity across its nation.

For 41 million Canadians, the world's 10th largest economy, he is a steady and thoughtful leader,

and I am proud to call him a friend.

Please join me in welcoming Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney.

Thank you very much, Larry.

I'm going to start in French and then I'll switch back to English.

Merci, Larry.

Thank you, Larry.

It is both a pleasure

and a duty to be with you tonight in this pivotal moment that canada

and the world going through today i will talk about a

rupture in the world order the end of a pleasant fiction

and the beginning of a harsh reality where geopolitics where the large main power geopolitics is submitted to no limits no constraints

On the other hand, I would like to tell you that the other countries, especially intermediate powers like Canada, are not powerless.

They have the capacity to build a new order that encompasses our values,

such as respect for human rights,

sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the various states.

The power of the less power starts with honesty.

It seems that every day we're reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry,

that the rules-based order is fading, that the strong can do what they can and the weak must suffer what they must.

And this aphorism of Thucydides is presented as inevitable,

as the natural logic of international relations reasserting itself.

And faced with this logic, there is a strong tendency for countries to go along to get along,

to accommodate, to avoid trouble, to hope that compliance will buy safety.

Well, it won't.

So what are our options?

In 1978, the Czech dissident Václav Havel, later president, wrote an essay called The Power of the Powerless.

And in it, he asked a simple question, how did the communist system sustain itself.

And his answer began with a green grocer.

Every morning, the shopkeeper places a sign in his window, workers of the world unite.

He doesn't believe it.

No one does.

But he places the sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along.

And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists.

Not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.

Havel called this living within a lie.

The system's power comes not from its truth but from everyone's willingness to perform as if it were true.

And its fragility comes from the same source.

When even one person stops performing, when the green grocer removes his sign, the illusion begins to crack.

Friends, it is time for companies and countries to take their signs down.

For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order.

We joined its institutions, we praised its principles, we benefited from its predictability.

And because of that, we could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.

We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false.

That the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient.

That trade rules were enforced asymmetrically.

And we knew that international law applied with varying rigor depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.

fiction was useful and American hegemony in particular helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system,

collective security and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.

So we placed the sign in the window.

We participated in the rituals and we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality.

This bargain no longer works.

Let me be direct.

We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.

Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration.

But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons.

Tariffs as leverage financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.

You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.

The multilateral institutions on which the middle powers have relied, the WTO, the UN, the COP,

the COP, the architecture, the very architecture of collective problem solving are under threat.

And as a result, many countries are drawing the same conclusions, that they must develop greater strategic autonomy in energy,

food, critical minerals, in finance and supply chains.

And this impulse is understandable.

A country that can't feed itself, fuel itself or defend itself has few options.

When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself.

But let's be clear-eyed about where this leads.

A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile, and less sustainable.

And there's another truth.

If great powers abandon even the pretense of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests,

the gains from transactionalism will become harder to replicate.

Hegemons cannot continually monetize their relationships.

Allies will diversify to hedge against uncertainty.

They'll buy insurance, increase options in order to rebuild sovereignty.

Sovereignty that was once grounded in rules but will increasingly be anchored in the ability to withstand pressure.

This room knows this is classic risk management.

Risk management comes at a price.

But that cost of strategic autonomy, of sovereignty, can also be shared.

Collective investments in resilience are cheaper than everyone building their own fortresses.

Shared standards reduce fragmentations.

Complementarities are positive some.

And the question for middle powers like Canada is not whether to adapt to the new reality, we must.

The question is whether we adapt by simply building higher walls or whether we can do something more ambitious.

Now, Canada was amongst the first to hear the wake-up call, leading us to fundamentally shift our strategic posture.

100

Canadians know that our old, comfortable assumptions that our geography and alliance memberships automatically conferred prosperity and security,

101

that assumption is no longer valid.

102

And our new approach rests on what Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, has termed value-based realism.

103

Or to put another way, we aim to be both principled and pragmatic.

104

Principled in our commitment to fundamental values, sovereignty, territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter,

105

and respect for human rights.

106

And pragmatic in recognizing that progress is often incremental, that interests diverge, that not every partner will share all of our values.

107

So we're engaging broadly, strategically, with open eyes.

108

We actively take on the world as it is, not wait around for a world we wish to be.

109

We are calibrating our relationships so their depth reflects our values.

110

And we're prioritizing broad engagement to maximize our influence, and given the fluidity of the world at the moment, the risks that this poses,

111

and the stakes for what comes next.

112

And we are no longer just relying on the strength of our values, but also the value of our strength.

113

We are building that strength at home.

114

Since my government took office, we have cut taxes on incomes on capital gains and business investment.

115

We have removed all federal barriers to interprovincial trade.

116

We are fast-tracking a trillion dollars of investments in energy, AI, critical minerals, new trade corridors and beyond.

117

We're doubling our defence spending by the end of this decade, and we're doing so in ways that build our domestic industries.

118

And we are rapidly diversifying abroad.

119

We've agreed a comprehensive strategic partnership with the EU, including joining SAFE, the European Defence Procurement Arrangements.

120

We have signed 12 other trade and security deals on four continents in six months.

121

In the past few days, we've concluded new strategic partnerships with China and Qatar.

122

We're negotiating free trade PACs with India, ASEAN, Thailand, Philippines and Mercosur.

123

We're doing something else.

124

To help solve global problems, we're pursuing variable geometry.

125

In other words, different coalitions for different issues based on common values and interests.

126

So on Ukraine, we're a core member of the Coalition of the Willing, and one of the largest per capita contributors to its defense and security.

127

On Arctic's sovereignty, we stand firmly with Greenland and Denmark and fully support their unique right to determine Greenland's future.

128

Our commitment to NATO's Article 5 is unwavering.

129

But we're working with our NATO allies, including the Nordic Baltic Gate, to further secure the Alliance's northern and western flanks,

130

including through Canada's unprecedented investments in over-the-horizon radar, in submarines, in aircraft, and boots on the ground.

131

Boots on the ice.

132

Canada strongly opposes tariffs over Greenland

133

and calls for focused talks to achieve our shared objectives of security and prosperity in the Arctic.

134

On plurilateral trade, we're championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the European Union,

135

which would create a new trading block of 1.5 billion people.

136

On critical minerals, we're forming buyer's clubs anchored in the G7 so that the world can diversify away from concentrated supply.

137

And on AI, we're cooperating with like-minded democracies to ensure that we won't ultimately be forced to choose between hegemons and hyperscalers.

138

This is not naive multilateralism, nor is it relying on their institutions.

139

It's building coalitions that work, issues by issue, with partners who share enough common ground to act together.

140

In some cases, this will be the vast majority of nations.

141

What it's doing is creating a dense web of connections across trade investment culture

142

on which we can draw for future challenges and opportunities.

143

Argue the middle powers must act together because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu.

144

But I'd also say that great powers can afford for now to go it alone.

145

They have the market size, the military capacity, and the leverage to dictate terms.

146

Middle powers do not.

147

But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness.

148

We accept what's offered.

149

We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.

150

This is not sovereignty.

151

It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.

152

In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice.

153

Compete with each other for favor or to combine to create a third path with impact.

154

We shouldn't allow the rise of hard power to blind us to the fact that the power of legitimacy,

155

integrity and rules will remain strong if we choose to wield them together.

156

Which brings me back to Havel.

157

What does it mean for middle powers to live the truth?

158

Well, first, it means naming reality.

159

Stop invoking rules-based international order as though it still functions as advertised.

160

Call it what it is,

161

a system of intensifying great power rivalry where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as coercion.

162

It means acting consistently, applying the same standards to allies and rivals.

163

When middle powers criticize economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent when it comes from another, we are keeping the sign in the window.

164

It means building what we claim to believe in.

165

Rather than waiting for the old order to be restored, it means creating institutions and agreements that function as described.

166

And it means reducing the leverage that enables coercion.

167

That's building a strong domestic economy.

168

It should be every government's immediate priority.

169

And diversification internationally is not just economic prudence, it's a material foundation for honest foreign policy.

170

Because countries earn the right to principled stands by reducing their vulnerability to retaliation. So Canada.

171

Canada has what the world wants.

172

We are an energy superpower.

173

We hold vast reserves of critical minerals.

174

We have the most educated population in the world.

175

Our pension funds are amongst the world's largest and most sophisticated investors.

176

In other words, we have capital talent.

177

We also have a government with immense fiscal capacity to act decisively.

178

And we have the values to which many others aspire.

179

Canada is a pluralistic society that works.

180

Our public square is loud, diverse and free.

181

Canadians remain committed to sustainability.

182

We are a stable and reliable partner in a world that is anything but.

183

A partner that builds and values relationships for the long term.

184

And we have something else.

185

We have a recognition of what's happening and a determination to act accordingly.

186

We understand that this rupture calls for more than adaptation.

187

It calls for honesty about the world as it is.

188

We are taking the sign out of the window.

189

We know the old order is not coming back.

190

We shouldn't mourn it.

191

Nostalgia is not a strategy.

192

But we believe that from the fracture, we can build something bigger, better, stronger, more just.

193

This is the task of the middle powers,

194

the countries that have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and the most to gain from genuine cooperation.

195

The powerful have their power.

196

But we have something, too.

197

the capacity to stop pretending, to name reality, to build our strength at home, and to act together.

198

That is Canada's path.

199

We choose it openly and confidently, and it is a path wide open to any country willing to take it with us.

200

Thank you very much.

201

Well, thank you, Prime Minister.

202

I don't think I've seen many standing ovations at Davos, so that was interesting.

203

You said, there was a phrase in your speech where you said, sovereignty now is the ability to withstand pressure.

204

Hmm.

205

Isn't Canada almost uniquely vulnerable to pressure because of the extent of your trade dependence on the United States?

206

Well, the proof is that we have been able to withstand the pressure, and there has been considerable pressure.

207

I'll give you a couple of facts.

208

We've actually created more jobs since the tariffs were put on than the United States in absolute number.

209

Economy's growing at the second fastest rate within the G7.

210

There are pockets of extreme pressure without question in Canada.

211

But headline, we're reacting.

212

The second thing, and it's a fundamental point, is the recognition that we can give ourselves far more than any foreign country can take away.

213

There's lots of efficiencies in having one Canadian market, the trillion dollars of domestic investment, and building these partnerships abroad,

214

all of which are bigger returns than what's been lost.

215

That's not to say we would rather not lose it, but we can withstand the pressure, and we are.

216

And I was interested that you said, basically, the old world's not coming back.

217

So you're not seeing this as a period where you just have to get through and normalcy will return.

218

I think that is our view.

219

And we regret it, but we're not going to sit around and mourn it.

220

We're acting.

221

And we're acting in a way both that's in our interest,

222

but we believe in a way with others that's building imperfectly and in steps a new system.

223

I'll give you one example in hand back, which is we are members of trade agreements that comprise already 1.4 billion people around the world.

224

So we have the most extensive network.

225

We are trying with others to bring some of those networks together.

226

The most prominent example is the Trans-Pacific Partnership in the EU, acting of a bridge.

227

it's not a direct benefit for Canada, but it is a benefit for Canada that these groups come together,

228

Ngozi is here, consistent with the WTO rules, both of which are.

229

And in that way, we're building back out amongst willing partners.

230

And you talked about the need not to put the sign in the window anymore, to pretend that things are still the same.

231

Do you think, to put it directly, that the NATO alliance is still doing that, still pretending it's the old transatlantic partnership, when it's really kind of going?

232

Well, I think clearly NATO is experiencing a test right now,

233

and the first response to that test has to be to respond in a way

234

that ensures the security of the Arctic in a robust way for all possibilities.

235

This is actually a point that we have been making in recent years

236

It's a point that I made at the NATO summit back in June, which seemed like a pledging summit,

237

but also was to get NATO policies in the right direction.

238

So I think in the immediate term, one of the imperatives is to reinforce things that Canada is doing,

239

Nordic-Baltic Gate are doing, the UK are doing, other NATO partners, France included,

240

in a comprehensive way that provides much greater security in the Arctic.

241

This is the test, and so I wouldn't say the NATO sign stays in the window, but we've got to meet the moment of that.

242

You also, a big theme of your speech was the need for middle powers to work together.

243

But you've just been to the other great power, to China.

244

And I think people are very intrigued by seeing that meeting.

245

And some people say, kind of, that's a mistake, really, because you're going to make yourself more dependent on China.

246

They're not that benign either.

247

The U.S will be very annoyed.

248

What's the defense of what you're doing, and what do you hope to get out of it?

249

Well, the first thing is to say it's not a defense.

250

It's an...

251

I know the way you framed the question, but it's offense.

252

It's building out.

253

It's something positive as opposed to against.

254

We're for something as opposed to being against.

255

The second is there are very clear guardrails in that relationship.

256

I spoke of calibration of relationships in my remarks.

257

That's what I mean by it.

258

But within those clear guardrails are huge opportunities in energy, both clean and conventional.

259

Obviously in motor vehicles, in agriculture, in financial services, all of which is mutually beneficial.

260

So it's additive.

261

Look, it's the second largest economy and it's our second largest trading partner.

262

We should have a strategic partnership with them within those guardrails, and that's what we've achieved.

263

And it is an interesting reversal, though, because I think certainly during the Biden administration, there was this sense that the Western world was trying to decouple from China or de-risk, at least.

264

And is now in this new world, that really going to go into reverse and de-risking from China because there are other risks is less of a thing.

265

You need, again, many in this room, this is their livelihood, you need a web of connections.

266

And to miss out in that web some of the largest ones, United States, we already have that, China, India, Mercosur, European Union, that's a mistake.

267

That's not managing your relationships properly.

268

That makes you stronger, makes you more resilient.

269

And then on top of that, I'll give you again, I'll appeal since it's in the headlines to the Nordics.

270

Nordics plus Canada, it's 20% of global GDP.

271

It's not the first thing people would realise.

272

But that relationship, which is deepening for security reasons, because we're like-minded, those are the types of partnerships that I think we'll see more of.

273

And you got a round of applause when you said something strong about standing on principle on Greenland.

274

Do you think we can find an off-ramp on that?

275

I mean, I'm sure you'll speak of it, but put it this way, if there isn't an off-ramp, where does this go?

276

I strongly believe that there is a better outcome

277

that come from the discussions that have been catalyzed in an unusual way, admittedly.

278

And we absolutely stand by the principles that are referenced.

279

That solution starts with security, and a security, yes, of Greenland, but more broadly of the Arctic.

280

Canada is foursquare contributing to that.

281

We're at the start of a major ramp-up above and beyond, so we'll be a major contributor to that.

282

NATO has to deliver on that.

283

We're working intensively in order to do it.

284

As well, prosperity for the people of Greenland.

285

And in the end, it comes back to the people there.

286

And there are opportunities to do that in ways that would strengthen all of the alliance.

287

And when President Trump says, oh, you know, Greenland's under threat from Russia, even from China, is that for real?

288

I would say that there are threat.

289

Russia is without question a threat in the Arctic.

290

Without question.

291

Russia does lots of horrible things and will take the opportunity to condemn their unjustified

292

and horrific assault on Ukraine almost at its fourth year.

293

They are a real threat in the Arctic, one against we need to protect,

294

which is why we have 364 five-day air, sea and land presence.

295

It's why we're adding to our submarine fleet, adding to our air fighter fleet,

296

why we're building out over-the-horizon radar to protect from Russian missile threats and others, and why we will work with our NATO partners.

297

The threat is more prospective than actual at this stage in terms of actual activity in the Arctic, and we intend to keep it that way.

298

Another big issue that's going to come up this week is this board of peace that President Trump is keen on.

299

I'm not sure whether it's for Gaza or for the entire world, but apparently Canada's been invited.

300

Are you going to join?

301

We have been invited.

302

And let me start by I think we should recognize the progress

303

that has been made in at least getting towards the end of the first phase of this process.

304

and the activation, if I can put it that way, of the process to set up the Board of Peace is the start of Phase 2.

305

Our view is, and that's to be welcomed, and this is a positive vehicle,

306

our view is we need to work on the actual structure of the vehicle.

307

You just referenced, is it for Gaza?

308

Well, the UN resolution, Security Council Resolution 2803, references a Board of Peace for Gaza.

309

That's where we see it becoming immediately operative, and it needs to be, in our view, it's better to be designed in that way for the immediate needs there.

310

There are many other needs around the world, first point.

311

Second point, it needs to coincide with the immediate full flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza.

312

We are still not where we need to be.

313

Conditions still are horrific, so that needs to come alongside.

314

We think there's aspects of the governance and the decision-making process that could be improved.

315

But we will work with others, obviously work with the United States, because we will do anything that we can to improve the situation,

316

the horrific situation there, and to move on to a path to a true two-state solution.

317

There's a suggestion you can get permanent membership of the Board of Peace by ponying up a billion dollars.

318

You going to write a check for that?

319

We would write checks and deliver in kind to improve the welfare of the people of Palestine.

320

But we want to see it delivered direct to those outcomes, those outcomes promoting peace, and so the mechanics and how it works that way.

321

Okay, final question.

322

President Trump and a lot of people who agree with him condemn globalism a lot.

323

And I suspect, you know, you would be the kind of epitome of a globalist.

324

You know, you worked for Goldman Sachs, I believe.

325

You were a central banker.

326

You know, you're comfortable and lived in several countries.

327

Is globalism, first of all, is it a thing?

328

And is it over?

329

I think, well, look, understanding how the world works, having appreciation for other cultures,

330

understanding the connections, and being able to, or at least appreciating, ways that how we connect, whether it's through technology, trade,

331

investment, culture, can enrich our lives.

332

And that's a good thing.

333

And it also helps solve problems.

334

Being detached from where you live and the broader needs of society, there is an epithet for that.

335

I don't know that the G word is the one.

336

Certainly what we're finding, to go back to the points I was making, is that there are a number of like-minded countries

337

that want to work through partnership to achieve those goals for their citizens and for the world more broadly.

338

the call is for more to recognize what's really going on right now

339

and to pool their resources to the benefit of citizens.

340

So it won't be global, it won't cover the globe, but it will be more powerful.

341

Okay, Prime Minister, thank you very much indeed.

342

Thank you.

343

Thank you.

Cos'è la tecnica dello Shadowing?

Shadowing è una tecnica di apprendimento delle lingue supportata da studi scientifici, originariamente sviluppata per la formazione dei traduttori professionisti e resa popolare dal poliglotta Dr. Alexander Arguelles. Il metodo è semplice ma potente: ascolti un audio in inglese di madrelingua e lo ripeti immediatamente ad alta voce — come un'ombra che segue il parlante con un ritardo di solo 1–2 secondi. A differenza dell'ascolto passivo o degli esercizi di grammatica, lo shadowing costringe il tuo cervello e i muscoli della bocca a elaborare e riprodurre simultaneamente i modelli di discorso reale. La ricerca dimostra che migliora significativamente la precisione della pronuncia, l'intonazione, il ritmo, il discorso connesso, la comprensione dell'ascolto e la fluidità del parlato — rendendolo uno dei metodi più efficaci per la preparazione alla prova di speaking dell'IELTS e per la comunicazione reale in inglese.

Pratica di Shadowing: Special Address by Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada | World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2026 - Impara a parlare inglese con i video

Per chi è questo video?

Parole e modi di dire da rubare

Come migliorare la pronuncia inglese con questo video

Cos'è la tecnica dello Shadowing?