It wasn’t a speech. It was a eulogy.

When Mark Carney took the stage in Davos, Switzerland he gave voice to what others have shrunk from saying: that the world as we have known it is dead. The post-war architecture of institutions and rules, of alliances and norms has passed on. And it’s not coming back.

No longer is America content to rule the western world in benevolent partnership with other like-minded nations. Or work through multilateral mechanisms for shared benefit. Under Donald Trump, we cannot even take it for granted that America will adhere to the rule of law.

As Carney observed, all of that lies buried in the past.

Our world now is shaped by the ascendant maxim of might makes right. Where giants like the US and China can be relied upon to act out of narrow self-interest. Where little hesitation will be shown to exert their will upon others – economically, diplomatically or even militarily.

The new world order is a world of disorder. A place that is less prosperous, less predictable and much more dangerous.

We can lament that. We can mourn it. We can even give speeches recalling and wishing for the return of it – as, ironically, former prime minister Justin Trudeau did in his own remarks to the WEF.

But, as Carney brutally concluded, ‘nostalgia is not a strategy.’

Indications that Carney’s words had registered widely were immediately evident. The gathered elite offered a standing ovation – this from a group who rarely shows enthusiasm for much beyond portfolio returns. The New York Times posted the speech in full. Praise from commentators and observers around the world exploded online. In the surest sign of impact, Trump interrupted his next-day address to chide Carney for exhibiting a lack of gratitude.

Which highlights the risks that attaches to what the prime minister had to say.

Carney’s speech is indisputably the most important international address any Canadian prime minister has provided in decades – delivered in a compact but captivating 17 minutes. His words will be echoed by other world leaders. His analysis is already becoming orthodoxy. In effect, Carney has established himself the de facto leader, in terms of intellect and expression, of that large group of nations including Europe and elsewhere struggling to understand and respond to Trump’s aggression.

As we saw from Trump’s reaction, that also puts a target on his back.

Carney advises us – again, in his speech – how he intends to manage that challenge. He advocates occasional demonstrations of principle combined with far more frequent exhibitions of pragmatism. This double-barreled real politik is the key to understanding – some critics might say rationalizing – his recent decisions to cultivate China and Qatar. Similarly, this formula allows us to predict future choices such as standing with Greenland (a principled posture tinged by fears for our own arctic) or possibly participating in the ridiculous Board of Peace (in what would surely be a pragmatic nod to fears of Trump’s vindictiveness).

Carney’s warning to Canadians is clear: a purely values-based foreign policy is no longer a luxury that we, or any middle power, can afford. Unpalatable choices will be forced upon us frequently as we shuffle between necessary compromises and concessions. This is something that Carney no doubt hopes Canadians will remember when, from time to time, he is required to go elbows down. Not, he will imply, out of weakness. But as part of the strategy he unveiled in Davos.

Amidst the enthusiastic reaction to Carney’s address however, one question has gone largely unasked: does it have a hope in hell of working?

Carney’s prescription is to invest in ourselves, boost outreach to other markets and pursue ‘variable geometry’ – meaning dynamically composed ad hoc coalitions. All as a hedge against the hegemons.

But will that be sufficient?

If we are attracted to Carney’s speech because of the open honesty of his analysis are we not obligated to apply that same sobriety in assessing our future prospects? If so, can we frankly imagine that some stitched together alliance of smaller nations will be enough to restrain Trump on hardly any issue? Particularly if he should feel slighted in some way – as he so often seems to be.

This is the uncomfortable corollary to Carney’s doctrine.

In a world without rules, where the powerful force their whims upon the rest of us, we may find that even the best strategy might not be a winning strategy. Even with a leader as commanding as Carney. Even guided by an approach as powerfully presented as what we witnessed at WEF.

Scott Reid was senior advisor and director of communications to Prime Minister Paul Martin. He is now a principal at Feschuk.Reid.