Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has warned that the erosion of the post‑war rules‑based order is forcing countries to look beyond the United Nations for protection and influence, a shift with immediate consequences for small Pacific Island nations. Speaking at the Lowy Institute last week, Carney said: “When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself. A country that can’t feed itself, fuel itself or defend itself has few options,” and reiterated his call—first set out in Davos earlier this year—for middle powers to form coalitions based on shared interests.
Carney was blunt that a “rupture” is occurring in the current world order. While he added that minilateral coalitions are not intended to replace the UN, his argument makes clear that, absent effective enforcement of international rules, middle‑power groupings are emerging as the pragmatic means states will use to secure resources and influence. He also corrected a misspeaking from his Davos remarks, urging middle powers not to linger in nostalgia for the old multilateral architecture and to instead build practical, interest‑based partnerships.
That trend is already visible. Australia sits in several minilateral arrangements — including the Quad and AUKUS — and, alongside Carney in Canberra, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese this month signed Australia into the G7’s critical minerals alliance. With sizeable mineral, agricultural and energy resources and developed defence capabilities, Australia is positioning itself as a central player in the coalitions that will shape access to strategic supplies and policy outcomes.
For Pacific Island states, however, the shift toward minilateralism poses a particular risk. The UN and broader multilateral forums have long provided structural protections and amplified small states’ voices: in the General Assembly every nation’s vote formally carries the same weight, and collective Pacific advocacy helped secure the 1.5°C target in the Paris Agreement. Minilateral clubs, by contrast, typically admit members on the basis of military capacity, economic scale, resource control and technological power—areas where most Pacific nations have little leverage.
The material stakes are immediate. Outside Papua New Guinea, no Pacific Island nation has proven fossil fuel reserves, leaving the region heavily dependent on imported oil, which currently accounts for about 80 percent of energy supply across Pacific states. Recent global oil market disruptions have already exposed how thin that margin is and how quickly countries must rely on larger partners for supply security. In a world where middle‑power coalitions help determine terms of resource access and resilience, exclusion can translate into real, tangible vulnerability.
Carney’s intervention places pressure on Australia and other middle powers to consider their responsibilities to nearby small states as they consolidate influence through minilateral groupings. Pacific leaders have long demanded direct agency rather than proxy representation; as the architecture of global governance shifts, whether those calls are met will affect not only diplomatic voice but the everyday practicalities of energy, food and defence security for island nations.
Leave a comment